From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Why does the tutorial talk about C-n/C-p etc? Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2016 16:40:56 +0200 Message-ID: <83mvq5jcw7.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87y49q64eg.fsf@russet.org.uk> <837fhamxwq.fsf@gnu.org> <87io0u4bip.fsf@russet.org.uk> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1457707350 17509 80.91.229.3 (11 Mar 2016 14:42:30 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2016 14:42:30 +0000 (UTC) Cc: phillip.lord@russet.org.uk, fgunbin@fastmail.fm, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Yuri Khan Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Mar 11 15:42:29 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1aeOGq-0007Ew-Kl for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 11 Mar 2016 15:42:28 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:55347 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aeOGm-0005m0-OZ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 11 Mar 2016 09:42:24 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:41650) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aeOGY-0005lk-Tt for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 11 Mar 2016 09:42:11 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aeOGU-0007gu-D6 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 11 Mar 2016 09:42:10 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:46658) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aeOFk-0007Ja-3t; Fri, 11 Mar 2016 09:41:20 -0500 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:3748 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1aeOFg-0006Ur-Gx; Fri, 11 Mar 2016 09:41:16 -0500 In-reply-to: (message from Yuri Khan on Fri, 11 Mar 2016 17:38:49 +0600) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:201467 Archived-At: > From: Yuri Khan > Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2016 17:38:49 +0600 > Cc: Emacs developers , > Phillip Lord > > On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 5:21 PM, Filipp Gunbin wrote: > > >> L235: If you are using a graphical display, such as X or MS-Windows, > >> there should be a tall rectangular area called a scroll bar on one > >> side of the Emacs window. > >> > >> If you are using a graphical display? I mean, of course, you are using a > >> graphical display? > > > > What's wrong with this? A user may be in text console. > > There’s nothing wrong with mentioning that Emacs *can also* function > in a text console, with several major restrictions (namely, the > keyboard input has an additional indirection layer, and the sets of > fonts and colors are severely reduced). But it is reasonable to assume > and encourage that a novice user will try the GUI version first. But all the tutorial does is say "IF you are using a graphical display". So we are going to bikeshed about a condition that might be true more often than false, and to which the tutorial paid a "tax" of 6 words? > Also, pretty much all potential new users (i.e. the target audience of > the tutorial) already know what a scrollbar is. It is a non-trivial decision where to draw the line about what is "common knowledge" and shouldn't be explained. Once again, the "tax" is a single sentence, so what's the harm? In any case, I suggest to postpone any further arguments until someone actually submits patches to make the tutorial better. The tutorial should be considered as a whole, not sentence by sentence. It is currently written from a certain POV that guides most of the text in a consistent way. You cannot change a sentence here and there without making the text inconsistent. So a change like the one that I think is proposed will require quite a thorough rewrite, which makes arguments about individual sentences and phrases futile.