From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#17362: 24.4.50; inconsistent key notation: `ESC' vs `' Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2014 21:34:42 +0300 Message-ID: <834n1cm1bx.fsf@gnu.org> References: Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1398796530 599 80.91.229.3 (29 Apr 2014 18:35:30 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2014 18:35:30 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 17362@debbugs.gnu.org To: Drew Adams Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Apr 29 20:35:23 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@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 1WfCs7-0001Gp-JL for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 29 Apr 2014 20:35:15 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:51820 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WfCs7-0007bq-0r for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 29 Apr 2014 14:35:15 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:38054) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WfCrz-0007XH-0e for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 29 Apr 2014 14:35:11 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WfCrt-00051O-WA for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 29 Apr 2014 14:35:06 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:56249) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WfCrt-00051K-Tm for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 29 Apr 2014 14:35:01 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1WfCrt-0005SZ-KL for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 29 Apr 2014 14:35:01 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2014 18:35:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 17362 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 17362-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B17362.139879648420961 (code B ref 17362); Tue, 29 Apr 2014 18:35:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 17362) by debbugs.gnu.org; 29 Apr 2014 18:34:44 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:45367 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1WfCrc-0005S1-1s for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 29 Apr 2014 14:34:44 -0400 Original-Received: from mtaout22.012.net.il ([80.179.55.172]:64002) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1WfCrZ-0005Ri-0Z for 17362@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 29 Apr 2014 14:34:42 -0400 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout22.012.net.il by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0N4T0000026CL000@a-mtaout22.012.net.il> for 17362@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 29 Apr 2014 21:34:34 +0300 (IDT) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([87.69.4.28]) by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0N4T0000829LAV70@a-mtaout22.012.net.il>; Tue, 29 Apr 2014 21:34:34 +0300 (IDT) In-reply-to: X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x X-Received-From: 140.186.70.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:88451 Archived-At: > Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2014 11:12:22 -0700 (PDT) > From: Drew Adams > Cc: dmoncayo@gmail.com, 17362@debbugs.gnu.org > > > I'm not talking about help, I'm only talking about the manual. The > > bug report was about inconsistencies in the manual. At least that's > > how I perceived it, and that's the only issue I set out to fix. > > Yes, thank you for that. You are welcome. > > > > > Seems like that would be a big change from the past and a change > > > > > from how Emacs itself communicates with users. AFAIK, Emacs > > > > > writes for the Delete key etc. The rule for function > > > > > keys and pseudo function keys has always been to use lowercase > > > > > (in angle brackets), no? > > > > > > > > Yes, because they are symbols. I did nothing about symbols, of > > > > course. > > > > > > What does that mean? > > > > Which part is unclear? > > Apparently you agree that the rule for function keys is lowercase. > Yet you leave some of them capitalized or uppercase? And the reason > is because those that you make lowercase are symbols? They are symbols used in Lisp code, whereas the other kind are words used in the user documentation. > > > Emacs writes . Why write ? Emacs writes > > > . Why write Delete or ? > > > > See the guidelines I used to decide on names and capitalization, I > > tried to explain why I choose this or that convention. > > The convention used should be the one that Emacs itself uses to > write key sequences. I disagree. The manual should make it easier for the reader to identify the keys it talks about. For that reason, using the keys' labels is IMO more useful and efficient than using their lowercase variants. > > I only fixed inconsistencies in the manual, without any relation to > > what Emacs says in help mode. > > You fixed only some inconsistencies in the manual, but that is OK > for this bug report. It is inconsistent to use sometimes > and other times, and , and , > and so on. There should be only these variants in the manual: If you find others, please report them as documentation bugs. I tried to fix them all, but maybe I missed some; it is a large manual.