From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: martin rudalics Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Subwindow terminology Date: Sun, 06 Nov 2011 11:59:27 +0100 Message-ID: <4EB6688F.7050300@gmx.at> References: <87wrbfrxqz.fsf@gnu.org> <4EB51CCC.6040806@gmx.at> <87hb2iohql.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <4EB53A16.3030604@gmx.at> <4EB64A64.8080902@gmx.at> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1320577181 17516 80.91.229.12 (6 Nov 2011 10:59:41 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2011 10:59:41 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Dave Abrahams Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Nov 06 11:59:37 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RN0Rs-0000U0-Gm for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 06 Nov 2011 11:59:36 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:60578 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RN0Rr-0001kP-Q8 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 06 Nov 2011 05:59:35 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:52800) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RN0Ro-0001kG-Vi for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 06 Nov 2011 05:59:33 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RN0Ro-0001YW-2y for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 06 Nov 2011 05:59:32 -0500 Original-Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net ([213.165.64.22]:42419) by eggs.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RN0Rn-0001YF-N9 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 06 Nov 2011 05:59:32 -0500 Original-Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 06 Nov 2011 10:59:29 -0000 Original-Received: from 62-47-58-45.adsl.highway.telekom.at (EHLO [62.47.58.45]) [62.47.58.45] by mail.gmx.net (mp008) with SMTP; 06 Nov 2011 11:59:29 +0100 X-Authenticated: #14592706 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1+TWcUKZJKT0cqh7rDV+2ZtUmVtNaanpLt9+lsr8c WoC61Hm2UiK+5L User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (Windows/20090302) In-Reply-To: X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-Received-From: 213.165.64.22 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:145897 Archived-At: > It's a broken metaphor if a child of X is not also a descendant of X, > and terribly counter-intuitive. The manual doesn't use metaphors ... > I don't have any idea what it means for > a child window to be adopted, and I don't think it matters. ... but if you want to think metaphorically, then "adoption" is the term to use. >> I didn't use the terms "ancestor" and "descendant" >> because these would introduce a genealogical connotation that doesn't >> exist. > > I'm sorry, but you did. You said "often a parent window is > genealogically a descendant..." Of course, you were explaining why the > term descendant was misleading, but I wouldn't have posted at all if it > weren't for the fact that you used these terms together. How else would you describe the fact that a child window is older than its parent window? martin