From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Robert J. Chassell" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [usability] mouse-1 for performing actions? Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 20:16:12 +0000 (UTC) Sender: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: References: <200205240043.g4O0hXj01216@aztec.santafe.edu> Reply-To: bob@rattlesnake.com NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1022271470 22744 127.0.0.1 (24 May 2002 20:17:50 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 20:17:50 +0000 (UTC) Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 17BLVW-0005uj-00 for ; Fri, 24 May 2002 22:17:50 +0200 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 17BLlY-0003DL-00 for ; Fri, 24 May 2002 22:34:24 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 17BLVv-0005pM-00; Fri, 24 May 2002 16:18:15 -0400 Original-Received: from megalith.rattlesnake.com ([140.186.114.245] helo=localhost) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 17BLTy-0005mF-00 for ; Fri, 24 May 2002 16:16:14 -0400 Original-Received: by rattlesnake.com via sendmail from stdin id (Debian Smail3.2.0.114) Fri, 24 May 2002 20:16:12 +0000 (UTC) Original-To: emacs-devel@gnu.org In-Reply-To: (message from Simon Josefsson on Fri, 24 May 2002 20:14:22 +0200) Errors-To: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.9 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:4347 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:4347 > ... a slow connection (perhaps 1200 baud; traceroute > indicated some sort of trouble in Newark, NJ) to a third machine, > using Emacs without a mouse.) Congratulations. :-) I would call such an environment unusable from a usability point of view. Many programs are no good at all for remote operations on a slow connection. QWEST had some sort of trouble in New Jersey and does not properly re-route packets the way the Internet was originally designed. I had to create a different route in order to get hold of my email. I agree, a slow connection makes for a poor interface, but fortunately, with Emacs, it is basically the same interface I always use, only slower. The point of this is that a good user interface takes into account not only good circumstances, such as I am enjoying as I type these words, but other circumstances as well, such as remote connections over poor lines, or being without a mouse on a laptop, or being situationally blind, as in a car, listening to email. In many ways, designing for varied conditions is the same as designing for varied users: on the one hand, the goal is to design an interface that works when you lose speed, a mouse, and a meta key. On the other hand, the goal is to design an interface that novices can not only use readily (for which I think menus and arrow keys are fine) but, at the same time, that novices can learn to work more efficiently than is possible with menus and arrow keys. (Your descriptions of GNOME and KDE suggests to me that their interfaces are designed for people who are novices and who are not expected to learn to become more efficient; I don't whether this is true.) Moreover, designing for varied users includes designing an interface that can be modified for people who type whole sentences or paragraphs before editing them (Viper mode) as well as being designed for people who edit each word or clause (Emacs in general). The question is what defaults are suitable? As a rule of thumb, for example, Emacs is oriented towards people who edit as they go along, rather than write for a while and then edit, as vi users do. (For someone who edits as they go along, the shift in vi from insert mode to edit mode and back requires too many keystrokes; for someone who goes into edit mode once a paragraph, the shift is hardly noticeable.) Similarly, Emacs is oriented towards people who prefer to cut, copy, and paste rather than type, and who operate on 50 or more different buffers at one time. Emacs is oriented towards people who navigate by doing incremental searches, since that is easy, quick, and intuitive. It is less intuitive and efficent to make nonincremental searches, so the default Emacs keybinding has an extra character in it. (The Edit menu provides a string search that is easy for novices and, being in a menu, is intrinsically slow. The menu also provides incremental search, but it goes without saying that no one in their right minds will use incremental search off a menu more than the once or twice it takes to learn, since that interface is so slow and inefficent.) Ok, I'm probably not a typical Emacs user, since I use Gnus more than the regular Emacs user. And Gnus, like most interactive Emacs modes, makes heavy use of buttons and hyperlinks where mouse-2 is quite tricky to use. That is weird: I have used Gnus without the mouse. And I am using mail mode now. Often, I use text, Texinfo, and Emacs Lisp mode frequently. All of these are interactive. None of these make much use of buttons or hyperlinks. I use the mouse to move point to a non-near random location and to mark regions that commands like `M-h' don't handle. Only in read-only buffers do I use the mouse much for clicking on buttons, and that only when that is efficient. (In the RMAIL-summary buffer, for example, I tend to use the `d' and `n' keys alot. I know I can mouse click on a line and do sometimes, but that is infrequent compared to the number of times I press the `d' and `n' keys.) Obviously, a mouse is useful in some circumstances. I am not saying that one should not use a mouse; I use one when able. I am being puzzled at the degree you use the mouse for things other than marking and copying regions text or for changing the location of point. ... heavy use of buttons and hyperlinks where mouse-2 is quite tricky to use. How is the use of mouse-2 trickier than the use of mouse-1 or mouse-3? -- Robert J. Chassell bob@rattlesnake.com Rattlesnake Enterprises http://www.rattlesnake.com