From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Kangas Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#46853: Confusing terminology "face height" instead of "font size" Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2021 16:43:07 -0600 Message-ID: References: <875z2a4x2c.fsf@gnus.org> <87tupu3cdd.fsf@gnus.org> <87pn0i3c0j.fsf@gnus.org> <83wnuq7izl.fsf@gnu.org> <874khu3aiw.fsf@gnus.org> <83o8g27hoa.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="4035"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: 46853@debbugs.gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii , Lars Ingebrigtsen Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Mar 03 23:44:09 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lHaDw-0000vN-Qd for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 03 Mar 2021 23:44:08 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:37148 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lHaDv-0000AS-FX for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 03 Mar 2021 17:44:07 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:55060) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lHaDq-00009v-1C for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 03 Mar 2021 17:44:02 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:45621) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lHaDp-0001UJ-QI for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 03 Mar 2021 17:44:01 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lHaDp-0007fY-NU for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 03 Mar 2021 17:44:01 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Stefan Kangas Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Wed, 03 Mar 2021 22:44:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 46853 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 46853-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B46853.161481139529418 (code B ref 46853); Wed, 03 Mar 2021 22:44:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 46853) by debbugs.gnu.org; 3 Mar 2021 22:43:15 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:57167 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lHaD4-0007eQ-UA for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 03 Mar 2021 17:43:15 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-pg1-f181.google.com ([209.85.215.181]:40643) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lHaD3-0007eE-Ko for 46853@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 03 Mar 2021 17:43:14 -0500 Original-Received: by mail-pg1-f181.google.com with SMTP id b21so17466160pgk.7 for <46853@debbugs.gnu.org>; Wed, 03 Mar 2021 14:43:13 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=CKOt5SeHvy4bISIu5BxWUaAtMqvaeUasFH9LDhZBq8k=; b=Yk7TggLfg5BNz0sI9OFQqZmvqikYMJtBwUUGygyXWq+v8X9ChbrGRahTOXMWABle+b fJGqbjVGbQTxORG1P2dZ7zWfh3wF9YzPLNVeq6G3Qp1y4fBZD/gFbJNEMYwanKdTJ/1H WNuVlU3OORldVla+OFZhINWoIvYtsR7AoSz7JUb3VDxOlo6peXxTHzRPTFHT4xitQM+q 4hbBW4Yfd3bLNjF0O82pao+Dk2C/eh7vs72i94YDjuKDG8f0y4ItZvwC7mBTkso+YKed wzZ1rw4CXDE/WfK4Khi02cPdQdU1niOQxjb9AC4V5gb6JzEjXIVSA4PP/V8+q5Lc+9M7 WcKA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532qGfF/YO4BeipOavZ5nFGVy7soCov0b42nPZD3uB0ViUEmhi8m 4PQj7dKBizOOb+SyQTgBYRX4wmCNCZ/EA0cVSnQ= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzpTupNECA3vZhA2CwSPVKOgQa9I1rfgT9GNRRcEDZfqCcFO5/KEiO6WOEUAKAx2CO/Se0TaoHc4ZVbxxygwCs= X-Received: by 2002:aa7:9711:0:b029:1ee:b2c7:ecfe with SMTP id a17-20020aa797110000b02901eeb2c7ecfemr929412pfg.58.1614811387552; Wed, 03 Mar 2021 14:43:07 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from 753933720722 named unknown by gmailapi.google.com with HTTPREST; Wed, 3 Mar 2021 16:43:07 -0600 In-Reply-To: <83o8g27hoa.fsf@gnu.org> X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:201335 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii writes: >> My understanding of what it does is: >> >> 1) The default face is definitely adjusted (even if it has an explicit >> :height). >> >> 2) The header face is also adjusted (even if it has an explicit :height) >> and you have that variable set. >> >> 3) All other fonts will also be adjusted, except those with an explicit >> :height. Thank you for laying this out clearly. >> There may be other rules, too (are there other face attributes that >> hinder size changes?), but this seems to indicate to me that we should >> just say (as in Stefan's patches) "changes the size of the fonts", and >> then link to a manual node that explains the three points above? >> >> Does that sound reasonable? > > Sorry, no, because that would mislead by catering to the "usual" cases > and ignoring the rest. What I think we should do instead is talk > about the default face, and then add a note that other faces will be > affected if they don't specify :height. Yes, this would be an improvement. But I have found it less than helpful with this talk about the `default' face, since it evidently scales *all* faces. It also maintains the terminological confusion that is the reason for this bug report -- i.e. it talks about "the default face" instead of "the font size" [in the current buffer]. So I would propose: a) Talking about "changing font size". That is after all the most striking user visible effect, and it is what normally happens in most buffers. b) On row two of the docstring (or three or whatever) we explain the exact details, something like: "This scales all faces that do not have an absolute :height specified. As an exception, the `default' face is scaled even if it has an absolute :height. This exception also applies to the `header-line' face if the variable `text-scale-remap-header-line' is non-nil." This seems both more accurate, and less confusing to me. I think the difference between the two proposals is that this puts the technical "implementation details" further down, and the user-visible effects higher up. (I put "implementation details" in quotes because it becomes important as soon as you start customizing faces with absolute values.) > (The special handling of header-line doesn't have to be mentioned > where header-line is not the most relevant feature; or we could say > "see also `text-scale-remap-header-line' in some of them). Agreed. We should decide the level of detail on a case-by-case basis.