From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Lennart Borgman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Why are and not called and ? Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2006 00:19:39 +0200 Message-ID: <44F7607B.6040902@student.lu.se> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1157062806 9812 80.91.229.2 (31 Aug 2006 22:20:06 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2006 22:20:06 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Emacs Devel Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Sep 01 00:20:03 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 1GIutD-0003Le-Vw for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 01 Sep 2006 00:20:00 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GIutD-0001Bc-BC for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 31 Aug 2006 18:19:59 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1GIut0-0001BQ-Ie for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 31 Aug 2006 18:19:46 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1GIusy-0001B0-Sg for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 31 Aug 2006 18:19:46 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GIusy-0001Ax-Ne for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 31 Aug 2006 18:19:44 -0400 Original-Received: from [81.228.11.98] (helo=pne-smtpout1-sn1.fre.skanova.net) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1GIv2g-0007Vg-QU for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 31 Aug 2006 18:29:47 -0400 Original-Received: from [192.168.123.121] (83.249.218.244) by pne-smtpout1-sn1.fre.skanova.net (7.2.075) id 44EDA0BC0021650F; Fri, 1 Sep 2006 00:19:41 +0200 User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.5 (Windows/20060719) Original-To: Drew Adams In-Reply-To: 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:59183 Archived-At: Drew Adams wrote: > > > and are standard names, which means that users > > > can find things out about them (e.g. Google). > > > > Are you seriously saying that it is more simple to find > > something about > > the usage of these keys if you use "next" than "page down"? > > > > Well, I don't know whether it is easier to search for one or > > the other. The point is that one is a standard name, so _if_ > > you can find doc on it then you have found doc about many things > > (e.g. apps) involving that key. > > Can you please explain what standard you refer to? > > Didn't Stefan mention X11? > Thanks, but then we are talking about different levels. You refer to a technical level. I am more interested in what the user sees, the physical keyboard. I think it is easier to understand and remember for users if we refer to the physical keyboard. This is also very standard today. > Are they not mostly called "left arrow" etc? Talking about them > together as just "up, down, left, right" makes it rather easy to > understand I guess. At least that was the case for me. > > And yet you had trouble getting from Page Down to Next? > Yes, absolutely. > To be clear, we need to give them unique names. And since they already have > unique names, from the standard, why not use those? And, then, why use those > standard names in some cases but not in others? > Of course we should use good standard technical names internally. I guess X11 is good for this since Stefan mentioned it. But for communication with the users refering to the physical keyboard is in my opinion better. Having different names is a bit complex of course, but I do not believe it can be more simple than that (and you have given good reasons for that). > It's the signal sent by the physical key that's important, no? How can you > even tell if your keyboard has an `prior' key - do you just look for a Page > Up label? That might not be sufficient, depending on what that key is mapped > to. > No problem on a standard pc I guess.