Visit New File menu item

Visit New File menu item

[Phillip Lord]

Would anyone object to changing this menu item to "Open New File"?

Currently, we have

Visit New File
Open File
Open Directory
Insert File


It seems unnecessarily inconsistent.

Phil

Re: Visit New File menu item

[Joost Kremers]

On Fri, Mar 11 2016, Phillip Lord wrote:
> Would anyone object to changing this menu item to "Open New File"?
>
> Currently, we have
>
> Visit New File
> Open File
> Open Directory
> Insert File

Wouldn't "Create New File" make more sense? Or simply "New File"?

-- 
Joost Kremers
Life has its moments

Re: Visit New File menu item

[John Wiegley]

>>>>> Joost Kremers <joostkremers@fastmail.fm> writes:

> Wouldn't "Create New File" make more sense? Or simply "New File"?

I agree, "Visit New File" is somewhat bizarre, and I'm not even entirely sure
what it should mean.  "Create New File" is obvious.

-- 
John Wiegley                  GPG fingerprint = 4710 CF98 AF9B 327B B80F
http://newartisans.com                          60E1 46C4 BD1A 7AC1 4BA2

Re: Visit New File menu item

[Clément Pit--Claudel]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 460 bytes --]

On 03/11/2016 04:30 PM, John Wiegley wrote:
>>>>>> Joost Kremers <joostkremers@fastmail.fm> writes:
> 
>> Wouldn't "Create New File" make more sense? Or simply "New File"?
> 
> I agree, "Visit New File" is somewhat bizarre, and I'm not even entirely sure
> what it should mean.  "Create New File" is obvious.

Except ‘Visit New File’ doesn't actually create a new file, does it? Not until you save it, I mean.
‘New file’ would work better, I feel.


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

RE: Visit New File menu item

[Drew Adams]

> > Wouldn't "Create New File" make more sense? Or simply "New File"?
> 
> I agree, "Visit New File" is somewhat bizarre, and I'm not even entirely
> sure what it should mean.  "Create New File" is obvious.

http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2005-10/msg00555.html

And other posts in that thread.  And there have been other threads
that painted this particular bike shed.

Not that we can't give it another coat of paint - after all, that
was 10 years ago.

Re: Visit New File menu item

[Phillip Lord]

Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com> writes:

>> > Wouldn't "Create New File" make more sense? Or simply "New File"?
>> 
>> I agree, "Visit New File" is somewhat bizarre, and I'm not even entirely
>> sure what it should mean.  "Create New File" is obvious.
>
> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2005-10/msg00555.html
>
> And other posts in that thread.  And there have been other threads
> that painted this particular bike shed.

I am neither unsurprised to find that it has been discussed before, nor
surprised that some one remembers.

I'm having a go at writing a tutorial, and in the section on files, the
first thing I hit is trying to explain what "visit" means.


> Not that we can't give it another coat of paint - after all, that
> was 10 years ago.

Blue with red spots would be good.

Phil

Re: Visit New File menu item

[Phillip Lord]

John Wiegley <jwiegley@gmail.com> writes:

>>>>>> Joost Kremers <joostkremers@fastmail.fm> writes:
>
>> Wouldn't "Create New File" make more sense? Or simply "New File"?
>
> I agree, "Visit New File" is somewhat bizarre, and I'm not even entirely sure
> what it should mean.  "Create New File" is obvious.


I think I agree with Joost. "New File" is short and to the point.

I've checked some other editors, and "New" is the most common. But, for
Emacs, this is somewhat confused by the presence of "New Window" and
"New Frame" (er, in the "File" menu...), so something else is needed.
But less is better, I think.

Phil

Re: Visit New File menu item

[Mathias Dahl]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 184 bytes --]

>
> I think I agree with Joost. "New File" is short and to the point.
>

Agree. "New File" is good and few would misunderstand it. I think that
"Visit" might make some users confused.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 450 bytes --]

Re: Visit New File menu item

[Yuri Khan]

On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 4:16 AM, Phillip Lord
<phillip.lord@russet.org.uk> wrote:

> I've checked some other editors, and "New" is the most common. But, for
> Emacs, this is somewhat confused by the presence of "New Window" and
> "New Frame" (er, in the "File" menu...), so something else is needed.
> But less is better, I think.

“File | New” is common because it is actually a standard. More
specifically, the CUA standard. New Window and New Frame would belong
to the Window menu.

Re: Visit New File menu item

[Richard Stallman]

[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider    ]]]
[[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies,     ]]]
[[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]

  > > Wouldn't "Create New File" make more sense? Or simply "New File"?

  > I agree, "Visit New File" is somewhat bizarre, and I'm not even entirely sure
  > what it should mean.  "Create New File" is obvious.

Some other programs nowadays say "New File" in the menu, and what it
means seems to be the same as Emacs's concept of visiting.  These
include Audacity and Libre Office, ISTR.  So I think "New File" will
be clear in Emacs too.

-- 
Dr Richard Stallman
President, Free Software Foundation (gnu.org, fsf.org)
Internet Hall-of-Famer (internethalloffame.org)
Skype: No way! See stallman.org/skype.html.

Re: Visit New File menu item

[John Wiegley]

>>>>> Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> writes:

> Some other programs nowadays say "New File" in the menu, and what it means
> seems to be the same as Emacs's concept of visiting. These include Audacity
> and Libre Office, ISTR. So I think "New File" will be clear in Emacs too.

Agreed.

-- 
John Wiegley                  GPG fingerprint = 4710 CF98 AF9B 327B B80F
http://newartisans.com                          60E1 46C4 BD1A 7AC1 4BA2

Re: Visit New File menu item

[Phillip Lord]

On Sat, March 12, 2016 9:23 pm, John Wiegley wrote:
>>>>>> Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> writes:
>>>>>>
>
>> Some other programs nowadays say "New File" in the menu, and what it
>> means seems to be the same as Emacs's concept of visiting. These include
>> Audacity
>> and Libre Office, ISTR. So I think "New File" will be clear in Emacs
>> too.
>
> Agreed.


Cool.

So, a) which branch? b) "Visit New File" also appears in the terminal
splash (alongside "Open Home Directory" and "Open *scratch* buffer". I
change there also?

Phil

Re: Visit New File menu item

[John Wiegley]

>>>>> Phillip Lord <phillip.lord@russet.org.uk> writes:

>>> Audacity and Libre Office, ISTR. So I think "New File" will be clear in
>>> Emacs too.
>> 
>> Agreed.

> Cool.

> So, a) which branch? b) "Visit New File" also appears in the terminal splash
> (alongside "Open Home Directory" and "Open *scratch* buffer". I change there
> also?

A corrective change of this nature should go on emacs-25. As far as I
understand, it's just a textual change to bring us into line with common
nomenclature?

-- 
John Wiegley                  GPG fingerprint = 4710 CF98 AF9B 327B B80F
http://newartisans.com                          60E1 46C4 BD1A 7AC1 4BA2

Re: Visit New File menu item

[Phillip Lord]

John Wiegley <jwiegley@gmail.com> writes:

>>>>>> Phillip Lord <phillip.lord@russet.org.uk> writes:
>
>>>> Audacity and Libre Office, ISTR. So I think "New File" will be clear in
>>>> Emacs too.
>>> 
>>> Agreed.
>
>> Cool.
>
>> So, a) which branch? b) "Visit New File" also appears in the terminal splash
>> (alongside "Open Home Directory" and "Open *scratch* buffer". I change there
>> also?
>
> A corrective change of this nature should go on emacs-25. As far as I
> understand, it's just a textual change to bring us into line with common
> nomenclature?

Yep, all done.

Phil

Re: Visit New File menu item

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: John Wiegley <jwiegley@gmail.com>
> Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2016 13:41:39 -0800
> Cc: joostkremers@fastmail.fm, Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>,
> 	emacs-devel@gnu.org
> 
> >>>>> Phillip Lord <phillip.lord@russet.org.uk> writes:
> 
> >>> Audacity and Libre Office, ISTR. So I think "New File" will be clear in
> >>> Emacs too.
> >> 
> >> Agreed.
> 
> > Cool.
> 
> > So, a) which branch? b) "Visit New File" also appears in the terminal splash
> > (alongside "Open Home Directory" and "Open *scratch* buffer". I change there
> > also?
> 
> A corrective change of this nature should go on emacs-25. As far as I
> understand, it's just a textual change to bring us into line with common
> nomenclature?

It's not a correction of a bug, it's a new feature.  So I think it
should go to master.

Re: Visit New File menu item

[John Wiegley]

>>>>> Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

>> A corrective change of this nature should go on emacs-25. As far as I
>> understand, it's just a textual change to bring us into line with common
>> nomenclature?

> It's not a correction of a bug, it's a new feature. So I think it should go
> to master.

How is that? I understood it to just be changing the text "Open New File" to
"New File", and related textual changes.

-- 
John Wiegley                  GPG fingerprint = 4710 CF98 AF9B 327B B80F
http://newartisans.com                          60E1 46C4 BD1A 7AC1 4BA2

Re: Visit New File menu item

[John Wiegley]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 452 bytes --]

>>>>> John Wiegley <jwiegley@gmail.com> writes:

> How is that? I understood it to just be changing the text "Open New File" to
> "New File", and related textual changes.

Indeed, examining d457fd9dc782465e1547f74021390c9d5951d6fa, it does not
qualify as a feature, but a minor correction.

-- 
John Wiegley                  GPG fingerprint = 4710 CF98 AF9B 327B B80F
http://newartisans.com                          60E1 46C4 BD1A 7AC1 4BA2

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 629 bytes --]

Re: Visit New File menu item

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: John Wiegley <jwiegley@gmail.com>
> Cc: phillip.lord@russet.org.uk,  rms@gnu.org,  joostkremers@fastmail.fm,  emacs-devel@gnu.org
> Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2016 20:00:05 -0800
> 
>>> It's not a correction of a bug, it's a new feature. So I think it should go
>>> to master.
>> 
>> How is that? I understood it to just be changing the text "Open New File" to
>> "New File", and related textual changes.
> 
> Indeed, examining d457fd9dc782465e1547f74021390c9d5951d6fa, it does not
> qualify as a feature, but a minor correction.

It isn't a correction, because the original text was not an omission.
It was a deliberate decision, which took the "New File" alternative
(as well as a few others) into consideration.

It's okay to revisit that decision, but such changes should not be
done during a pretest, no matter how simple they look: you never know
what baggage they could bring with them, and pretest must not change
behavior, unless required to fix a bug.

Also, such changes should be discussed more thoroughly, waiting for
interested parties to chime in.  E.g., one problem with "New File" is
that we don't actually enforce the "new" part -- you can visit an
existing file via that menu item.  Not sure how important this nit is,
but OTOH that single word "Visit" is also hardly so very important
that we should rush making the change overnight.

Besides, there were also suggestions in this thread to change other
menu items.  If agreed, it makes sense to do all those changes
together, as part of revamping the menus; having only one of them on
the release branch makes much less sense.

In any case, such a change should be in NEWS.

Re: Visit New File menu item

[John Wiegley]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1338 bytes --]

>>>>> Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

> It's okay to revisit that decision, but such changes should not be done
> during a pretest, no matter how simple they look: you never know what
> baggage they could bring with them, and pretest must not change behavior,
> unless required to fix a bug.

> Also, such changes should be discussed more thoroughly, waiting for
> interested parties to chime in. E.g., one problem with "New File" is that we
> don't actually enforce the "new" part -- you can visit an existing file via
> that menu item. Not sure how important this nit is, but OTOH that single
> word "Visit" is also hardly so very important that we should rush making the
> change overnight.

You make excellent points, Eli.

Phillip, I'm sorry to give you the go ahead and then turn it around, but I
can't ignore Eli's wise counsel on this point.

Can one of you please revert this for emacs-25? (I'm traveling at the moment).
After, let's discuss which menu options we might want to change and why, so
that others have more of a chance to chime in. Although there was a mini-
consensus on "New File", maybe we didn't give it enough time.

Thank you,
-- 
John Wiegley                  GPG fingerprint = 4710 CF98 AF9B 327B B80F
http://newartisans.com                          60E1 46C4 BD1A 7AC1 4BA2

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 629 bytes --]

Re: Visit New File menu item

[Phillip Lord]

John Wiegley <jwiegley@gmail.com> writes:

>>>>>> Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
> You make excellent points, Eli.
>
> Phillip, I'm sorry to give you the go ahead and then turn it around, but I
> can't ignore Eli's wise counsel on this point.
>
> Can one of you please revert this for emacs-25? (I'm traveling at the moment).
> After, let's discuss which menu options we might want to change and why, so
> that others have more of a chance to chime in. Although there was a mini-
> consensus on "New File", maybe we didn't give it enough time.


I am happy to do a broad overview of the menu items if you wish, for
either Emacs 25.1 or 26. There are some other oddities that leap to mind
some which probably can't be fixed (window and frame manipulation inder
"file") but also some that can (some of "Options" are selected by
default, and "Highlight Region" can probably go, for starters).

I wonder if we need some way of writing an "RFC" -- I would rather write
a document about this, take and incorporate comments, then implement
from the document, rather than discuss it here, then try to remember
what everyone said, or stitch it together from the mailing list
archives.

Perhaps some org-files in an orphan branch in the repo?

Phil

Re: Visit New File menu item

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: phillip.lord@russet.org.uk (Phillip Lord)
> Cc: rms@gnu.org,  joostkremers@fastmail.fm,  emacs-devel@gnu.org
> Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2016 19:56:36 +0000
> 
> I am happy to do a broad overview of the menu items if you wish, for
> either Emacs 25.1 or 26.

I thought you proposed to change some more items, or do I misremember?

> I wonder if we need some way of writing an "RFC" -- I would rather write
> a document about this, take and incorporate comments, then implement
> from the document, rather than discuss it here, then try to remember
> what everyone said, or stitch it together from the mailing list
> archives.
> 
> Perhaps some org-files in an orphan branch in the repo?

Maybe just posting a patch is better.  Or screenshot(s) of the
modified menus.  Then you could collect comments to that.

Re: Visit New File menu item

[Nicolas Semrau]

On 13.03.2016 20:56, Phillip Lord wrote:
> John Wiegley <jwiegley@gmail.com> writes:
>
>>>>>>> Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
>> You make excellent points, Eli.
>>
>> Phillip, I'm sorry to give you the go ahead and then turn it around, but I
>> can't ignore Eli's wise counsel on this point.
>>
>> Can one of you please revert this for emacs-25? (I'm traveling at the moment).
>> After, let's discuss which menu options we might want to change and why, so
>> that others have more of a chance to chime in. Although there was a mini-
>> consensus on "New File", maybe we didn't give it enough time.
>
>
> I am happy to do a broad overview of the menu items if you wish, for
> either Emacs 25.1 or 26. There are some other oddities that leap to mind
> some which probably can't be fixed (window and frame manipulation inder
> "file") but also some that can (some of "Options" are selected by
> default, and "Highlight Region" can probably go, for starters).
>
> I wonder if we need some way of writing an "RFC" -- I would rather write
> a document about this, take and incorporate comments, then implement
> from the document, rather than discuss it here, then try to remember
> what everyone said, or stitch it together from the mailing list
> archives.
>
> Perhaps some org-files in an orphan branch in the repo?
>
> Phil
>

John recentely introduced a collection point for such plans and 
proposals in the wiki:

https://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/Proposals

Re: Visit New File menu item

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2016 21:37:22 -0000
> From: "Phillip Lord" <phillip.lord@russet.org.uk>
> 
> So, a) which branch? b) "Visit New File" also appears in the terminal
> splash (alongside "Open Home Directory" and "Open *scratch* buffer". I
> change there also?

a) master
b) yes, please

Re: Visit New File menu item

[Nicolas Semrau]

On 11.03.2016 17:58, Phillip Lord wrote:
>
>
> Would anyone object to changing this menu item to "Open New File"?
>
> Currently, we have
>
> Visit New File
> Open File
> Open Directory
> Insert File
>
>
> It seems unnecessarily inconsistent.
>
> Phil
>

While we're on the topic of small inconsistencies of that menu: when you 
activate recentf-mode, the menu entry "Open Recent" is added to that 
part of the menu.  The wording of all the other entries follows the 
pattern "verb (adjective) subject" and "Open Recent" only reads like 
"verb adjective" to me.  Would it make sense to change that to "Open 
Recent File", in order to bring it in line with the others?

Re: Visit New File menu item

[Angelo Graziosi]

Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> Also, such changes should be discussed more thoroughly, waiting for
> interested parties to chime in.  E.g., one problem with "New File" is
> that we don't actually enforce the "new" part -- you can visit an
> existing file via that menu item.  Not sure how important this nit is,
> but OTOH that single word "Visit" is also hardly so very important
> that we should rush making the change overnight.

Well said!

My opinion is that "New File" is wrong if linked to the sequence "C-x C-f".

Usually, I use "C-x C-f" both for loading ("visiting") an existing file 
in Emacs both to create a new file (not existing!).

Notice that other applications which have "New File" mean really a *new* 
(i.e. creating) file. Usually they have "C-N" for "New File" and "C-O" 
for "Open File". So using "New File" in Emacs seems misleading, unless 
you use a different key sequence for New/Open File.

Really I would remove the "Open File" item and would leave "Visit File" 
(without New), with the obvious key sequence "C-x C-f".

Why don't you like "Visit"? Why you want to follow others giving up the 
original tradition of Emacs?

Anyway this is only my opinion.

Ciao,
  Angelo.

RE: Visit New File menu item

[Drew Adams]

> > Also, such changes should be discussed more thoroughly, waiting for
> > interested parties to chime in.  E.g., one problem with "New File" is
> > that we don't actually enforce the "new" part -- you can visit an
> > existing file via that menu item.  Not sure how important this nit is,
> > but OTOH that single word "Visit" is also hardly so very important
> > that we should rush making the change overnight.
> 
> Well said!
> 
> My opinion is that "New File" is wrong if linked to the sequence "C-x C-f".
> 
> Usually, I use "C-x C-f" both for loading ("visiting") an existing file
> in Emacs both to create a new file (not existing!).
> 
> Notice that other applications which have "New File" mean really a *new*
> (i.e. creating) file. Usually they have "C-N" for "New File" and "C-O"
> for "Open File". So using "New File" in Emacs seems misleading, unless
> you use a different key sequence for New/Open File.
> 
> Really I would remove the "Open File" item and would leave "Visit File"
> (without New), with the obvious key sequence "C-x C-f".
> 
> Why don't you like "Visit"? Why you want to follow others giving up the
> original tradition of Emacs?
> 
> Anyway this is only my opinion.

IIRC, all of this was hashed over in the older thread that I
mentioned could usefully serve as a starting point for a new
discussion (and it other threads before that one, IIRC).

I believe that I recall each of the things that you and Eli
have said, as well as everything that others have said so
far, already having been said before.

We should try to add to the previous discussion or move beyond
it, not just repeat it.

That said, I am glad that you have said what you did.  I just
wish that folks would take a look at previous discussions of
this - especially those who would like to propose a change.
So far, the proposed changes are not new, and the reasons
given for them are not new.

Re: Visit New File menu item

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Angelo Graziosi <angelo.graziosi@alice.it>
> Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2016 00:37:42 +0100
> 
> My opinion is that "New File" is wrong if linked to the sequence "C-x C-f".
> 
> Usually, I use "C-x C-f" both for loading ("visiting") an existing file 
> in Emacs both to create a new file (not existing!).
> 
> Notice that other applications which have "New File" mean really a *new* 
> (i.e. creating) file. Usually they have "C-N" for "New File" and "C-O" 
> for "Open File". So using "New File" in Emacs seems misleading, unless 
> you use a different key sequence for New/Open File.
> 
> Really I would remove the "Open File" item and would leave "Visit File" 
> (without New), with the obvious key sequence "C-x C-f".

We had that originally, but then the menu item was split in 2 (in
Emacs 23): Open File insists on the file to exist, while Visit New
File doesn't.