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: ASCII-folded search [was: Re: Upcoming loss of usability ...] Date: Sat, 27 Jun 2015 08:34:46 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <390c25d4-2050-4131-8a38-31ae09454541@default> References: <<20150615142237.GA3517@acm.fritz.box>> <<87ioamz8if.fsf@petton.fr>> <<32013464-2300-46c6-ba46-4a3c36bfee5d@default>> <<87twu62nnt.fsf@mbork.pl>> <<87oakdfwim.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>> <<83wpz1lh7c.fsf@gnu.org>> <> <<83oakdl7yj.fsf@gnu.org>> <> <<83ioall3x5.fsf@gnu.org>> <> <> <<87h9pzxtyi.fsf@mail.linkov.net>> <> <<87k2uudoqr.fsf@mail.linkov.net>> <> <<87616c94g4.fsf@mail.linkov.net>> <> <<87h9pw6922.fsf@mail.linkov.net>> <> <> <<87a8vn75r7.fsf@mail.linkov.net>> <> <> <<0f72b0bd-0170-414c-b926-0b836a973d67@default>> <> <<9b42a5bc-48e3-4111-b37d-280867903527@default>> <> <<12de813f-cffa-4231-95a4-5b9ee2709123@default>> <> <> <<834mltd0qk.fsf@gnu.org>> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1435419328 27269 80.91.229.3 (27 Jun 2015 15:35:28 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 27 Jun 2015 15:35:28 +0000 (UTC) Cc: bruce.connor.am@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Jun 27 17:35:15 2015 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 1Z8s8Q-0004zQ-Bo for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 27 Jun 2015 17:35:14 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:35920 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Z8s8P-000721-Cl for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 27 Jun 2015 11:35:13 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:47300) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Z8s8A-00071t-KM for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 27 Jun 2015 11:34:59 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Z8s89-0007XT-EI for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 27 Jun 2015 11:34:58 -0400 Original-Received: from userp1040.oracle.com ([156.151.31.81]:39699) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Z8s83-0007TK-CP; Sat, 27 Jun 2015 11:34:51 -0400 Original-Received: from userv0022.oracle.com (userv0022.oracle.com [156.151.31.74]) by userp1040.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2) with ESMTP id t5RFYjPc009838 (version=TLSv1 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Sat, 27 Jun 2015 15:34:45 GMT Original-Received: from aserv0122.oracle.com (aserv0122.oracle.com [141.146.126.236]) by userv0022.oracle.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id t5RFYjIu006913 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Sat, 27 Jun 2015 15:34:45 GMT Original-Received: from abhmp0011.oracle.com (abhmp0011.oracle.com [141.146.116.17]) by aserv0122.oracle.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id t5RFYjF8010130; Sat, 27 Jun 2015 15:34:45 GMT In-Reply-To: <<834mltd0qk.fsf@gnu.org>> X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Oracle Beehive Extensions for Outlook 2.0.1.9 (901082) [OL 12.0.6691.5000 (x86)] X-Source-IP: userv0022.oracle.com [156.151.31.74] X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.4.x-2.6.x [generic] X-Received-From: 156.151.31.81 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:187594 Archived-At: > We have just installed that feature, and it's still being worked on > to eliminate some rough edges and unintended consequences. Let it be > refined, then let it be used by users (including you, Drew) for some > time, and then let's collect user experience and complaints and see > if something needs to be fixed. _Then_ we will have experience and > real data points to discuss constructively and efficiently. I'm guessing that the feature you are talking about is the char folding that Bruce/Artur installed, and *not* the suggestion by Kaushal to "take over the mode line" and use "a lot of space to verbosely display the searching options". If so then we are in violent agreement and I think you did not understand me. My comments were directed to the suggested mode-line feature, not to the char-folding feature. My message was to not go down the road of changing the mode line that way now without thinking about what might be appropriate when there are more folding possibilities. My point was precisely to let people use the new char folding for a while, *without* also immediately jumping into a UI change of the mode line to indicate whether it is on or off. That's all. I am in favor of the char-folding advancement, and of its refinement over time, based on user experience etc., exactly as you describe. I was quite clear that I am "very thankful that we will soon have some additional char folding beyond case folding." This is a step forward. I agree that we should "collect user experience and complaints and see if something needs to be fixed." And not just wrt fixing something but wrt improvement suggestions, including any suggestions about how to let users know what the current search state is. Time will tell what is most helpful for that. My point was only that we should not prematurely opt now for a new, mode-line UI means of conveying the status - something we don't even do currently for case folding. Wait and see what might work best for this - that was my message. As you put it, "_Then_ we will have experience and real data points to discuss constructively and efficiently." We could discuss it now, but we should not just throw some take-over-the-mode-line UI change out there now, which might end up tying our hands (yes, momentum) and not make sense if and when more folding possibilities become available. And even discussion about the UI possibilities is best carried out when we've had more experience with the new feature. A priori, I am in favor of our eventually adding some way of indicating the current search state, including perhaps using the mode-line. My objection is to us prematurely opting for a way that might not fit well with the existence of multiple foldings.