From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: How to make Emacs popular again: Use monospaced fonts less Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2020 11:14:27 +0200 Message-ID: <20201014091426.GB11864@tuxteam.de> References: <835z7qfp6h.fsf@gnu.org> <87ft6lgw5y.fsf_-_@gnus.org> <87lfgahtcw.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <87o8l51mh3.fsf@gnus.org> <87k0vt9tgx.fsf@protesilaos.com> <87v9fd1dyp.fsf@gnus.org> <87a6wp9rmv.fsf@protesilaos.com> <87r1q11bx3.fsf@gnus.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="9Ek0hoCL9XbhcSqy" Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="39480"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Oct 14 11:16:03 2020 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@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 1kSct4-000A2l-Sr for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 14 Oct 2020 11:15:58 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:51762 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kSct3-0002uk-TH for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 14 Oct 2020 05:15:57 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:44472) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kScrx-0002HT-6z for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 14 Oct 2020 05:14:49 -0400 Original-Received: from mail.tuxteam.de ([5.199.139.25]:44757) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kScru-0005j1-0d for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 14 Oct 2020 05:14:48 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tuxteam.de; s=mail; h=From:In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject:To:Date; bh=6qpIMxAJMY8BAp/Nj8oLOtACeHJcgjYJwNQVmzYToVM=; b=ZBYrt8PZrIfD0R0UK4XRVqDn3jM39TMuLY6AJUo33ZqpZePub/+r6QvNWHxmFhJhyAWEivn66oB4wrgazkl0DoGC7EOy+ZeUGYYZJY2pjajsJrz7Z/zmcVAkTb/LG/yRxtOCokE5eou3TIgs6SLHdqfReCtkm4sszoibdhgGD7u3muH8zxhghP2VKqRv1jbsT7JekSlQV7Gm2GPFGhU30YOE2eXvTRyOmZ1FMQsqFI4f6YnT8GTfspw7nTzeAXo/Ar+EyA6Xq6HA/ut3aRMmlioKix9/0GEIc355FFr3nQDMLcVUXvDNUuFipxbsqUtL3PYq1zHV01zTqjUTq0UDUg==; Original-Received: from tomas by mail.tuxteam.de with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1kScrg-0004bY-1v for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 14 Oct 2020 11:14:32 +0200 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Received-SPF: pass client-ip=5.199.139.25; envelope-from=tomas@tuxteam.de; helo=mail.tuxteam.de X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/10/14 05:14:32 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = Linux 3.1-3.10 [fuzzy] X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:257625 Archived-At: --9Ek0hoCL9XbhcSqy Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Oct 14, 2020 at 04:30:48AM -0400, James Cloos wrote: > >>>>> "LI" =3D=3D Lars Ingebrigtsen writes: >=20 > LI> There seemed to be some claims that even totally numerical elements > LI> (that doesn't change the number of digits) also leads to shifts that'= ll > LI> have to be handled (like display-time-mode), and that just isn't lini= ng > LI> up with my experiences. >=20 > Opentype offers both fixed width and proportional digits (not to mention > oldstyle). Fixed width digits do make sense: often you want more than just aligning a numerical "field" -- you'd like the individual digits to align. This is an issue at least as old as Metafont (at least whithin our digital bubble, I'm sure the lead-and-ink typesetters were well aware of that!). Let's call those fonts the "normal" fonts (with a tip off the hat to Russel's paradox ;-) The question here is whether there is a space the width of a digit (for "normal fonts", that is). It seems Unicode has a place for that: U+2007 aka=E2=80=87FIGURE SPACE. Wh= ether those fonts implement that is left as an exercise... Me? I use fixed fonts on-screen. Actually my eyes very much prefer them. This might be the result of acclimatisation. Cheers - t --9Ek0hoCL9XbhcSqy Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAl+GwXIACgkQBcgs9XrR2kbbNQCcDrHtX1LlibAIEUqwmVzNoUzK C7IAnisWNeMZD8HwLqssVug4ABA7UStl =214+ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --9Ek0hoCL9XbhcSqy--