From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Alan Mackenzie Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Info tutorial is out of date Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2006 10:38:45 +0100 Message-ID: <20060718093844.GA1397@muc.de> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1153215735 5205 80.91.229.2 (18 Jul 2006 09:42:15 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2006 09:42:15 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Jul 18 11:42:13 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G2m5Y-0004F3-Q9 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 18 Jul 2006 11:42:01 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G2m5X-0000ip-AZ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 18 Jul 2006 05:41:59 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1G2m4S-0000Fw-SC for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Jul 2006 05:40:52 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1G2m4P-0000Ea-Tp for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Jul 2006 05:40:52 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G2m4P-0000EV-O5 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Jul 2006 05:40:49 -0400 Original-Received: from [193.149.48.1] (helo=mail.muc.de) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA:32) (Exim 4.52) id 1G2m7G-0003al-SP for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Jul 2006 05:43:47 -0400 Original-Received: (qmail 10936 invoked from network); 18 Jul 2006 09:40:43 -0000 Original-Received: from acm.muc.de (HELO localhost.localdomain) (Debian-exim@193.149.49.134) by mail.muc.de with SMTP; 18 Jul 2006 09:40:43 -0000 Original-Received: from acm by localhost.localdomain with local (Exim 4.50) id 1G2m2P-0000ih-5M; Tue, 18 Jul 2006 10:38:45 +0100 Original-To: Drew Adams Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:57253 Archived-At: Good morning, Drew! On Mon, Jul 17, 2006 at 04:01:16PM -0700, Drew Adams wrote: > > To me, structural navigation is not the goal; it is a means > > to achieve the > > goal, which is getting info from a manual (whether quick look-up or > > front-to-back reading). > Reading a manual in order is one paradigm of learning a package. So > we cannot dispose of the structural navigation keys. > No. The proper conclusion is that we cannot dispose of *structural > navigation*. This does not necessarily have anything to do with *keys*. Just like travelling by car doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the steering wheel or brake pedal, you mean? > Anyway, no one proposed to dispose of either structural navigation or > structural-navigation keys. The proposal was to *postpone* (not dispose > of) *teaching* about structural-navigation *keys*. Each of those 3 > qualifiers is important. This is what gets up my nose about what you're proposing. All your proposals would marginalise keyboard use. Please recognise this, and acknowledge that it isn't just a minor side effect, it's a critical and essential feature of your proposed change. You've described me and a few other people as "mouse haters". This is uncalled for, since my only "hate" is the resentment at being forced to use the animal myself. It would be more apt to describe the "other side" as "keyboard haters": they are steadily erradicating keyboard use for anything other than typing letters and numbers. Firstly, they move the documentation of key sequences away from where people will see them (as in Gnome), then they make them unusably clunky (SuSE 8.0's installation program was like this - that was the last SuSE I ever bought), thirdly they leave them non-functional, presumably by bolting them on as an afterthought and not testing them (there are lots of proprietary programs like this). You're proposing the first of these things. If you "postpone" their description to a place where it costs readers effort to find, that's hardly better than leaving them out altogether. I can assure you it is maddeningly frustrating to read about some interesting feature described with mouse actions, then have to search out a node called "Keyboard Shortcuts", scan through a long, long table to find what could be this feature, try it out, then somehow get back to the original node. The structural navigation keys need to be described together with structural navigation. Surely? > I didn't paint things in black & white terms, and it's not honest to > characterize my proposal that way. Please recognise the validity of the way other people see your proposal. -- Alan.