From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Drew Adams" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: RE: Info tutorial is out of date Date: Sun, 16 Jul 2006 18:07:30 -0700 Message-ID: References: <20060716233525.GA1369@muc.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1153098505 22434 80.91.229.2 (17 Jul 2006 01:08:25 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2006 01:08:25 +0000 (UTC) Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Jul 17 03:08:24 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 1G2Haq-0005Jo-8D for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 17 Jul 2006 03:08:16 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G2Hap-0006WS-D7 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 16 Jul 2006 21:08:15 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1G2Hac-0006WN-OZ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 16 Jul 2006 21:08:02 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1G2Hab-0006WB-2U for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 16 Jul 2006 21:08:01 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G2Haa-0006W8-TF for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 16 Jul 2006 21:08:00 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.41.67] (helo=mx20.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA:32) (Exim 4.52) id 1G2Hd9-0000cb-8b for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 16 Jul 2006 21:10:39 -0400 Original-Received: from [141.146.126.228] (helo=agminet01.oracle.com) by mx20.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1G2HaY-0000zi-To for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 16 Jul 2006 21:07:59 -0400 Original-Received: from rcsmt250.oracle.com (rcsmt250.oracle.com [148.87.90.195]) by agminet01.oracle.com (Switch-3.1.7/Switch-3.1.7) with ESMTP id k6G8I7h9004659 for ; Sun, 16 Jul 2006 20:07:56 -0500 Original-Received: from dhcp-amer-csvpn-gw1-141-144-64-45.vpn.oracle.com by rcsmt250.oracle.com with ESMTP id 1574898351153098464; Sun, 16 Jul 2006 19:07:44 -0600 Original-To: "Emacs-Devel" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <20060716233525.GA1369@muc.de> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1807 X-Whitelist: TRUE 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:57134 Archived-At: > 1. I'm *not* a mouser. Except to click links sometimes, I use keys in > Info (and Emacs). This is not about what I use or what you use or 27% > or 97% of emacs-devel use; it is about how best to teach newbies about > Info. The discussion is not entirely unlike C-n vs. in the Emacs tutorial. What was the consensus there? I don't know, and I don't have time to check. You check and let us know, if it's pertinent. > Mousing or not seems to be a hot-button issue for those who > don't use a mouse. To me, it is a non-issue. I don't promote use of > the mouse, and I am all for recommending in the tutorial (and > elsewhere) that newbies learn to use keyboard commands. Your suggested change to that tutorial would be promoting mouse use at the expense of keyboard use. Not at all. Howzat? You are conflating what is widespread and usual with what is good. No, believe me, I am not. I am conflating what is widespread with what users will know when they first come to Emacs and Info. Know whom you communicate with. Know your pupil. Know even your enemy, if you want to look at it that way. This is bad! What is bad? Using a mouse? There's no innocent get-out here - not for you, not for me. Keep your ideas about evil for the local Anti-Mouse League meetings. I don't see what that has to offer here. I like rodents of all sorts, as long as they don't eat all the corn and rice. > Drew, you've hit a raw nerve. Whether one uses a mouse > extensively or not is a highly emotional thing, Not to me it's not, BTW. I could not care less about whether someone uses a mouse extensively or not. Just doesn't excite me either way. Sorry. > Your original post was a rant, and you used lots of loaded > words and phrases (like "shortcut"). You shouldn't be too > surprised at getting flamed a little bit. > My original post was not at all a rant; the fact that you see > it that way says something about your hot button. Er, didn't you yourself describe your original post as a rant? ;-) You're right, but I meant that I was ranting when I expressed disappointment with Info, criticizing it left and right. I was not ranting about my proposed changes - far from it. And I was not ranting for or against the use of a mouse. Never, no how. > Key bindings *are* shortcuts - what's wrong with that? 1) They are > commonly called "keyboard shortcuts" by many people. 2) They are > shorter (quicker) to use than clicking menus and links with a mouse - > don't you agree? They are shorter (quicker) than using `M-x' - don't > you agree? What is it about "shortcut" that sets you off? It's one of those sort of words/phrases so beloved of journalists/salesmen/politicians that can be used to denigrate something, yet the j/s/p, when called on it, can convincingly pretend it was totally innocent and factual, as you have done in the preceding paragraph. Like "paragraph"? That's one of those so-called words/phrases so beloved of evil-doers that can be used to denigrate us flat-earthers. Also, "convincingly" - gotta hate that one too. Huh? Are you putting me on, Alan? What is the evil conspiracy behind the phrase "keyboard shortcut" or the word "shortcut"? Is it because it has "short" in it? I really don't get it. Please believe me that I am not pretending anything, innocent and factual or otherwise. What is sinister about "shortcut"? A bit like you can denigrate Lisp by calling it a "traditional" language... That's your fantasy, not mine. Please don't bring in everything under the moon, here. No one is putting down Lisp or shortcuts (err... key bindings). Get a hold of yourself, please. In English, "shortcut" usually carries connotations of something naughty. Not in my English, it doesn't. Maybe that's the problem. Not in American English (to my knowledge); it does not. As with any word, it *can* carry a connotation of naughtiness, depending on the context. BTW, if it did carry a connotation of naughtiness, then I'd say we should adopt it immediately, and sprinkle it liberally all over the Emacs docs and UI. *That* would settle the shortcut vs mouse war once and for all, in your favor. Naughtiness always wins, especially with the young'ns. Tell them the mouse is the "proper" and "clean" way to go, and everyone will become a keyboard convert overnight. Like "the boys took a shortcut across the farmer's field" or "the engineers, being pressed for time, took shortcuts in the maintenance schedule, thus causing the aeroplane to crash". You are really stretching things. You can take a shortcut doing anything; it can lead to good and improvement or bad and disaster. Tell a Frenchman that he took a shortcut to get from Paris to the ski slopes and he'll beam with pride as a "bison fute" (the sole bison clever enough to leave the herd and find a shorter way 'round). I think you're way off base, here, Alan, unless "shortcut" has some special meaning in your neck of the woods. It certainly does not everywhere I've ever set my feet - or else I've been oblivious to the secret connotation all these years. Yes, "The building contractor took shortcuts with the welds, and thus compromised safety and quality" is a sentence that uses "shortcut" as a bad thing. But that's not the only way to use it. Thus when you call a key sequence a "shortcut", you're transmitting the subliminal message "this is somehow illegitimate and the mouse action is the canonical correct way to invoke the function". Nonsense! You're not serious, are you? This is a joke, right? I suspect this was deliberate, introduced by a genius of a wordsmith around the time that mice were just catching on, in the early 1980s. And I suspect a touch of paranoia - no offense. Unless this is all just a big hoax - that would be a good one on me! A really good one! What's wrong with the neutral term "key sequence"? Nothing. Nothing wrong with "key binding" either. And nothing wrong with communicating with those misled millions who (shudder!) mistakenly think the right term is "keyboard shortcut". I proposed adding a jargon glossary to the manual long ago, which was done, I believe. I pointed out that "yank" means (roughly) "paste", and so on. I didn't propose replacing "yank" by "paste", I proposed only pointing out to newbies that Emacs jargon used "yank" for what they might know as "paste". It's about bridging the gap between what people know and what you want them to know. BTW, think how derogatory "yank" is to us Yanks, Alan. How would you like it if we called it "britting" or "scotting" or "krauting"? Well, think how us Yanks feel when you call it "yanking". Unacceptable insensitivity. And "yank" can mean to hang a man, too. Now that I think of it, I suspect that "yank" was introduced intentionally to insult yankees, especially those who have a past relative who was unfairly hung. Not to mention the naughty connotation of "yanking" on you-know-what and the assonant term "wanking". Yes, there is veritably nasty stuff underneath, when you scratch the surface of the Emacs terminology. There's a PhD dissertation on this waiting for someone who is interested in investigating further. And what about "killing" a buffer or text? What kind of subliminal message was RMS trying to push on our innocent youth? How many millions have already been corrupted by him and his words that kill? No wonder there are more and more gangs, drugs, and guns on the streets. Corrupter of youth! Prepare the hemlock now! > I think there are a lot more pure keyboard users out > there than you do. > Who knows? I tried to offer some objective info - do you have > something to add to that? What you quoted missed the point. Sure 99.9999% of computers are equipped with mice, and they get used day in day out. OK, what *is* the point? *My* point about all this mice-and-keyboard nonsense is that if 99.9999% of users who might become interested in using Info are already used to using a mouse, then let's accomodate them. *If* we have a battle against mice (and I don't), then let's take that battle out of the Info tutorial. Who doesn't fire up Firefox (or that ghastly proprietary program it's steadily superseding) every day and mouse it? Even I do, I'm quite ashamed of you, Alan, really. You know there are ways around that, don't you. What good excuse do you have? What about Emacs as a Web browser? What about Lynx? Do you sleep well at night after an evening of your filthy, mousey scum surfing? For shame! Father, forgive him, for he has m o u s e d. BTW, how do you fool Emacs into thinking you don't have a mouse, so it doesn't feel ashamed of you? Do you unplug mousey when you use Emacs? Oh, there's an option for that? Pretty sneaky. (Trying to pretend to me that you didn't know what a mouse was... hah!) so I'd get included amongst habitual mouse users in that survey. A more pertinent question would be "do you regularly use an application without recourse to the mouse?" OK. How many do you think would answer "yes" to your "more pertinent" question? 0.0001%? 1%? 10%? Does it matter to you? Your mind's made up already, isn't it? What if it were only 0.0000000001% who regularly use an app without mouse? Would that persuade you? Be honest. I don't think so. > I also think that not encouraging frivolous mouse use is a Good > Thing. > I'm not encouraging mouse use, "frivolous" or otherwise. I proposed > that we get to the heart of the teaching matter in Info right away, > using the obvious tools available that everyone knows how to use: > links and buttons. > I didn't weigh in on the keyboard vs mouse issue at all - > I didn't even know there was such an issue - it's your hot button, not > mine. I mentioned mouse-usage statistics in my followup to your rant > because I think it's a mistake to orient the entire Info tutorial to > the use patterns of a tiny minority. We're back in C-n vs. territory now. You ARE weighing in on the mouse vs. keyboard issue. You are proposing telling people to use mouse clicks instead of key sequences, I don't think so. When did you hear me say that we should tell people to use the mouse, rather than keyboard? On the contrary, I've said repeatedly that we can recommend that they use the s h o r t c u t s. I've said more than once that using the mouse to navigate is *not* (NOT, _NOT_, *NOT*) something that needs to be taught. No one should ever waste time trying to teach people to navigate with a mouse - never. There - happy? I've said it again. and have opined that those key sequences are incidental rather than essential. No. *Teaching* those key sequences is incidental to learning about *Info*. Please read all the words; the meaning suffers, otherwise. I disagree with you here - it seems to me like telling a newbie musician not to bother learning to play scales, just to go directly to the music, the important stuff. You disagree with yourself here, because you've misunderstood what I said. I have experience of telling ordinary computer users about key sequences: "You know, you can type alt-f s to save the file rather than grasping for the mouse.", and they typically 'phone me up a day or two later with "Alan, thank you! It's SO MUCH easier that way!". I support you in that. Good job. I've done that too. Keep it up. > I don't see the point in making the first half of the Info tutorial a > battle for keyboardism against creeping mousism. Get the new users to > the info on Info right away. Bring them to keyboard heaven afterward. The sooner you start learning to play scales, the sooner you can play Beethoven half decently. > Perhaps we can discuss the details - of disagreement, > for example - of the main points. I don't disagree with your other main points. "Me too!".