Re: [Emacs-diffs] trunk r115470: eww: exit and close actions

[Ted Zlatanov <tzz@lifelogs.com>]

On Fri, 13 Dec 2013 10:06:41 -0500 Stefan Monnier <monnier@IRO.UMontreal.CA> wrote: 

>> Web browsing is a separate UI domain from the other UI domains Emacs
>> covers.  The UI for navigation, input, and even scrolling is different.
>> It's most like an Info file but there are fundamental differences (no
>> clear hierarchy, interactive, etc.)  So my idea was to make web browsing
>> in Emacs more like web browsing outside Emacs, and I thought my changes
>> were a step in that direction.

SM> I view it as trying to lie to the user ;-)

All computing is lying to the user, so I am OK with that.

>> The idea was to separate "close" from "exit" even if the current
>> implementation doesn't do it perfectly, because tha separation is
>> typical in the "web browsing" UI domain.

SM> AFAIK "close" should mean "close the current tab", and "exit" should
SM> mean "exit the application, closing all tabs and killing the process".

Right.

SM> Some of the problems I see in the context of eww:
SM> - eww doesn't have tabs.
SM> - eww-exit doesn't exit the application.
SM> - eww-exit does not close all the eww buffers/tabs/windows you might
SM>   have opened in the current Emacs session.
SM> - eww can display a web page multiple times in different windows, so the
SM>   meaning of "close the tab" is unclear.

I agree the current implementation is suboptimal but your problem is
with the fundamental idea of separating "close" from "exit."  So unless
you want to separate them at some level or at least acknowledge the
difference between them, there's no point in discussing the items above
and we should instead focus on improving `quit-window' or the eww
equivalent thereof.

SM> I really see it as trying to put a square peg in a round hole.
SM> And I really don't see the benefit since eww users will be familiar with
SM> Emacs anyway, so it's not like we'd impose them some new concepts they
SM> shouldn't need to know.

OK, so what would you like (and let's wait for Lars to comment before we
take action, if you want to revert)?

- revert back to `q' being `quit-window', no "close" or "exit" concepts
- implement some way to quit all eww windows for privacy and security
- implement "close" and "exit" differently but still try to separate them
- implement "close" and "exit" separately with different names
- some combination?  something else?

Thanks
Ted