From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Drew Adams Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: RE: Modernize frame-title-format: "%b - GNU Emacs" Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2020 13:36:33 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: References: <86d03bpqsw.fsf@protonmail.com> <4276dbad-f8ed-4a5d-8960-800b4b059a61@default> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="22807"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: Wayne Harris , Emacs developers To: Yuri Khan Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Aug 28 22:37:23 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 1kBl7j-0005r6-Ce for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 28 Aug 2020 22:37:23 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:40714 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kBl7i-0008Fz-Fn for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 28 Aug 2020 16:37:22 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:56432) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kBl74-0007pP-G7 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 28 Aug 2020 16:36:42 -0400 Original-Received: from aserp2120.oracle.com ([141.146.126.78]:58242) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kBl72-0004O1-Dm for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 28 Aug 2020 16:36:42 -0400 Original-Received: from pps.filterd (aserp2120.oracle.com [127.0.0.1]) by aserp2120.oracle.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 07SKYSXu067734; Fri, 28 Aug 2020 20:36:36 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=oracle.com; h=mime-version : message-id : date : from : sender : to : cc : subject : references : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding; s=corp-2020-01-29; bh=ipGi3iHnH3HogGpzxPqq5g3biDI67EjKiW2qHF4wYrw=; b=FZUAAXEv62ueW3BXMw+eJ7zhvW86znI9PBullYWJU9I9yCUseyDgBQRAvXKib5aoeChB E5IvupnmBaiOtjKTINfEQ0VNGGXD4tulR3jxJ4hn/8EEX1hNkWFsRXhsd8kjBJ1seqvd 9ViqLmGRTRwaWcQAoOCRbSpsFM1lercm+yID+6QAHK9LvprkDdoQ2ZIujmUQBV73hbLa gKrnnBMF1lcYqz1kMmHpc4c+tO2XX6oZRhaxka89QXbiNS9bH6995NI7zsq4eyHN53ge u+csZOgadQ7dpAJeI6KaC9cvgRnuA4S5Xv0VlBZcFeZybxYL4FxaRhygLuavUT7+ZB0H MQ== Original-Received: from aserp3030.oracle.com (aserp3030.oracle.com [141.146.126.71]) by aserp2120.oracle.com with ESMTP id 333dbsdy46-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Fri, 28 Aug 2020 20:36:36 +0000 Original-Received: from pps.filterd (aserp3030.oracle.com [127.0.0.1]) by aserp3030.oracle.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 07SKUxd9190055; Fri, 28 Aug 2020 20:36:36 GMT Original-Received: from userv0122.oracle.com (userv0122.oracle.com [156.151.31.75]) by aserp3030.oracle.com with ESMTP id 333r9q32a3-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 28 Aug 2020 20:36:36 +0000 Original-Received: from abhmp0003.oracle.com (abhmp0003.oracle.com [141.146.116.9]) by userv0122.oracle.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id 07SKaYVc023156; Fri, 28 Aug 2020 20:36:34 GMT In-Reply-To: X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Oracle Beehive Extensions for Outlook 2.0.1.9.1 (1003210) [OL 16.0.5044.0 (x86)] X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=6000 definitions=9727 signatures=668679 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 malwarescore=0 mlxscore=0 bulkscore=0 adultscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 phishscore=0 suspectscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2006250000 definitions=main-2008280149 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=6000 definitions=9727 signatures=668679 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 bulkscore=0 clxscore=1015 priorityscore=1501 impostorscore=0 phishscore=0 malwarescore=0 mlxlogscore=999 spamscore=0 mlxscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 suspectscore=0 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2006250000 definitions=main-2008280149 Received-SPF: pass client-ip=141.146.126.78; envelope-from=drew.adams@oracle.com; helo=aserp2120.oracle.com X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/08/28 15:03:30 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = Linux 3.1-3.10 [fuzzy] X-Spam_score_int: -53 X-Spam_score: -5.4 X-Spam_bar: ----- X-Spam_report: (-5.4 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.959, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-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:254365 Archived-At: > > > The name of the application in the title is useful. It helps you pick > > > the Emacs window out of multiple applications operating on the same > > > file. For example, a Dired buffer showing a directory and Thunar > > > showing the same directory. > > > > > > This is important in contexts where the window contents are not > > > visible, e.g. a taskbar showing minimized windows, or a > > > tiling/tabbing/stacking window manager such as i3 showing a single > > > window in the stack and the titles of all other windows in the same > > > stack. > > > > The discussion is about the _default_ frame title. > > Users can define their own title formatting. >=20 > Users should not have to customize the title for the common case. 100% agreement. > Which I believe to be multiple applications on the desktop. Sure. But see below (you quoted, but didn't address). Even if someone agrees that the app name should be present, should it really be leftmost? And how often is the app name really helpful? > > How common is the use of multiple applications > > (in separate window-mgr windows) for the same > > file or directory (or other argument)? ? How often, for the same file? If you see only the file or dir name, is it hard to know that the app is Emacs? Most of the time? > > (Not a rhetorical question - that's never been my > > experience.) > > > > Wrt your examples of a file or dir, showing the > > buffer name should be even more specific, and > > even better distinguish from some other app ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > window for the same file or dir, no? Especially > > if the other app puts its app name first in the > > title. >=20 > All well-behaved applications in many desktops (Windows, XFCE, GNOME, > KDE) show the document name and their own application name in the > title bar. I haven't argued that the app name shouldn't be included. (But see the discussion about whether the app icon might sometimes suffice.) I argued to put the more specific info first, i.e., leftmost. The app name is less specific than the file name etc. Imagine if every one of your browser windows had "Google Chrome" or "Firefox" or "Internet Explorer" or "Brave" as its leftmost text. Imagine how useful/useless that would be for picking a window out of a task-bar list, a set of tabs, or any other list. Imagine if every mail-client window had the client name at the far left: "Outlook" or whatever. And in fact, at least in my environment (MS Windows), it is NOT the case that "all well-behaved apps show... the app name in the title bar". Not if web browsers and mail clients (and lots more) count as well-behaved, at least. The app name is totally missing from such window-mgr windows. And thank goodness, as that's the least interesting info to show, especially when the full info might get truncated (which happens for tabs etc.). I do pick out an app by its icon. I don't know, but I'm guessing, that someone with specific accessibility needs has an alternative for this, other than a requirement that the app names appear as text. What I see in the title bar for a Chrome or Brave or Firefox or IE browser is this, from the left: 1. A site icon. E.g. fancy "T" for New York Times site. 2. A page title, possibly with a subtitle. E.g. "Opinion | Kenosha Tells Us More About Where the Right Is Headed Than the R.N.C. Did". That means I can easily pick out that web page by its app icon and page title. Would you really prefer that the frame title be something like this? "Google Chrome Opinion | Kenosha Tells Us More About Where the Right Is Headed Than the R.N.C. Did" Maybe I'm just misunderstanding you. I hope so. > It=E2=80=99s a convention,=20 Maybe some places, i.e., for some apps. I don't see it for most apps, including web browsers and mail client, on MS Windows. (And you did mention "Windows.) I do see it for some apps, but typically for apps that have only one window. > and it=E2=80=99s useful because this way > application authors do not have to consider whether a document name > alone is enough for the user to distinguish the window. Somebody has > already thought this through and decided that both components are > useful. I take your point. I don't consider it to override all other considerations, but I guess it's one thing to consider when rethinking what the default behavior might be. I'm glad you brought it up.