Re: a look at the browser scene & emacs

Discussion in 'Python' started by Xah Lee, Feb 26, 2009.

  1. Xah Lee

    Xah Lee Guest

    On Feb 26, 12:57 am, Miles Bader <> wrote:
    > There is ample room for people to discuss this evolution, but approaches
    > that start with "first, toss out the existing user interface" aren't gonna fly.


    Who said to toss out existing user interface, you?

    Are you saying that i start my suggestion with “throw out existing
    UI� If so, please point out where.

    > Emacs isn't going to turn into a fancy notepad clone, regardless of what
    > "modern" users may (think they) want...


    In what way you imagine emacs is going to be a fancy Microsoft Notepad
    clone?

    I've wrote the following suggestions on emacs modernization in the
    past 3 years:

    • The Modernization of Emacs
    http://xahlee.org/emacs/modernization.html

    • Suggestions on Emacs's Scratch Buffer
    http://xahlee.org/emacs/modernization_scratch_buffer.html

    • Emacs's M-‹key› Notation vs Alt+‹key› Notation
    http://xahlee.org/emacs/modernization_meta_key.html

    • Emacs's Menu Usability Problem
    http://xahlee.org/emacs/modernization_menu.html

    • Emacs's Mode Line Modernization Suggestions
    http://xahlee.org/emacs/modernization_mode_line.html

    • Usability Problems With Emacs's Letter-Case Commands
    http://xahlee.org/emacs/modernization_upcase-word.html

    • Suggestions on Emacs's mark-word Command
    http://xahlee.org/emacs/modernization_mark-word.html

    • Suggestions on Emacs's Line-Cutting Commands
    http://xahlee.org/emacs/modernization_fill-paragraph.html

    • Emacs Should Adopt HTML To Replace Texinfo
    http://xahlee.org/emacs/modernization_html_vs_info.html

    • Emacs Should Support HTML Mail
    http://xahlee.org/emacs/modernization_html_mail.html

    • Emacs's HTML Mode Sucks
    http://xahlee.org/emacs/emacs_html_sucks.html

    which item, in which article, do you think that emacs is going to turn
    into Notepad clone?

    is the suggestion of using modern standard shortcut set of X C V for
    Cut, Copy, Paste, of which Linux uses, means it is turning emacs to a
    fancy Notepad clone?

    Is fixing emacs's confusing undo and no redo, that is periodically
    bitched by programer in blogs, considered making emacs into a Notepad
    clone?

    Is the suggestion for a statistics based ergonomic keybinding design
    that are more faster to execute, easier on the fingers, and easier to
    remember, mean it is turning emacs to a fancy notepad clone?

    is the suggestion of getting rid of *scratch* buffer, and introduce a
    command “New†with shortcut Ctrl+n, that creates new buffer anytime
    anywhere, which lets user create multiple scratch buffers defaulting
    to any mode and compatible for the rest of Linux's shortcuts, means it
    is a fancy Microsoft Notepad?

    is the suggestion of changing notation from C- and M- to Ctrl+ and Alt
    +, such that it reflects the lable on the keyboard, and Richard
    Stallman agrees may be a good idea, means it's Notepad?

    is the suggestion of supporting html mail, and interface to gmail out
    of the box, means it's becoming Microsoft Notepad?

    is it simply the fact that making things easier to use, means kissing
    Microsoft's ass?

    Is the open source Firefox, and Google's extremely advanced
    technologies and easy to use applications such as gmail, google map,
    google earth, google code, all becoming Microsoft Notepad clone?

    Xah
    ∑ http://xahlee.org/

    ☄
    Xah Lee, Feb 26, 2009
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Xah Lee

    Tassilo Horn Guest

    Xah Lee <> writes:

    Hi Xah,

    > is the suggestion of using modern standard shortcut set of X C V for
    > Cut, Copy, Paste, of which Linux uses, means it is turning emacs to a
    > fancy Notepad clone?


    The functionality stays the same, but IMO it would confuse most users.
    Killing is not cutting, yanking is not pasting. The whole concepts
    (kill-ring vs. simple copy&paste) are much different.

    > Is fixing emacs's confusing undo and no redo, that is periodically
    > bitched by programer in blogs, considered making emacs into a Notepad
    > clone?


    It's much more advanced than the usual sequential undo, but I admit that
    it can get confusing sometimes. So instead of dropping it I'd prefer to
    think about a better UI for it.

    > Is the suggestion for a statistics based ergonomic keybinding design
    > that are more faster to execute, easier on the fingers, and easier to
    > remember, mean it is turning emacs to a fancy notepad clone?


    Users use different commands and your bindings may be better for you on
    your querty keyboard, but I'm sure they're not on my German Dvorak Type
    II keyboard.

    > is the suggestion of getting rid of *scratch* buffer, and introduce a
    > command “New†with shortcut Ctrl+n, that creates new buffer anytime
    > anywhere, which lets user create multiple scratch buffers defaulting
    > to any mode and compatible for the rest of Linux's shortcuts, means it
    > is a fancy Microsoft Notepad?


    Such a easy key like C-n is much too valuable for such a rarely used
    command. C-x b foobar RET is ok, isn't it?

    > is the suggestion of changing notation from C- and M- to Ctrl+ and Alt
    > +, such that it reflects the lable on the keyboard, and Richard
    > Stallman agrees may be a good idea, means it's Notepad?


    Nope, but I'm not sure if it's possible for emacs to get the right key.
    Here, M is Alt, but Ctrl is indeed on the CapsLock key...

    And it makes key sequences much longer to write with little or no
    benefit.

    > is the suggestion of supporting html mail, and interface to gmail out
    > of the box, means it's becoming Microsoft Notepad?


    Definitively not. AFAIK Gnus can handle gmail accounts quite well.
    Reading HTML mail works nice, too (with emacs-w3m as helper). A simple
    editor would be nice for some people, too. But I guess that most
    current devs arent interested in writing one, cause in "the tech
    geekers" world mail is in text/plain.

    Bye,
    Tassilo
    Tassilo Horn, Feb 26, 2009
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Xah Lee

    Xah Lee Guest

    On Feb 26, 1:59 am, Tassilo Horn <> wrote:
    > Xah Lee <> writes:
    >
    > Hi Xah,
    >
    > > is the suggestion of using modern standard shortcut set of X C V for
    > > Cut, Copy, Paste, of which Linux uses, means it is turning emacs to a
    > > fancy Notepad clone?

    >
    > The functionality stays the same, but IMO it would confuse most users.
    > Killing is not cutting, yanking is not pasting. The whole concepts
    > (kill-ring vs. simple copy&paste) are much different.


    emacs's killing/yaning/kill-ring is basically the same idea as copy/
    cut/paste-board.

    Basically, emacs's pasteboard is just a extended version, such that it
    keeps a record of previous copied contents. To users, effectively,
    this means you can do paste-previous. That's all there is to it.

    So, it's brainless to make emacs intuitive to people and adopt modern
    UI standards. Basically, copy, cut, paste, is all the same, except in
    emacs you have also paste previous.

    > > Is fixing emacs's confusing undo and no redo, that is periodically
    > > bitched by programer in blogs, considered making emacs into a Notepad
    > > clone?

    >
    > It's much more advanced than the usual sequential undo, but I admit that
    > it can get confusing sometimes. So instead of dropping it I'd prefer to
    > think about a better UI for it.
    >
    > > Is the suggestion for a statistics based ergonomic keybinding design
    > > that are more faster to execute, easier on the fingers, and easier to
    > > remember, mean it is turning emacs to a fancy notepad clone?

    >
    > Users use different commands and your bindings may be better for you on
    > your querty keyboard, but I'm sure they're not on my German Dvorak Type
    > II keyboard.


    If your are on a special keyboard, you are on your own.

    The ergonomic keybinding

    • Ergoemacs Keybindings
    http://xahlee.org/emacs/ergonomic_emacs_keybinding.html

    plays well with modern UI in Windows, Mac, Linux. It improves emacs
    keybinding, but also support standard shortcut sets. In no way, it
    loses any emacs advantage, while, it makes emacs compatible and
    intuitive for vast majority of computer users, and improve efficiency
    for those heavy touch typists and programers who are into the concept
    of not leaving hands off the keyboard.

    > > is the suggestion of getting rid of *scratch* buffer, and introduce a
    > > command “New†with shortcut Ctrl+n, that creates new buffer anytime
    > > anywhere, which lets user create multiple scratch buffers defaulting
    > > to any mode and compatible for the rest of Linux's shortcuts, means it
    > > is a fancy Microsoft Notepad?

    >
    > Such a easy key like C-n is much too valuable for such a rarely used
    > command. C-x b foobar RET is ok, isn't it?


    This issues is discussed before in some hundred or 2 hundred thread in
    2008.

    the proposal in detail is here:

    • Suggestions on Emacs's Scratch Buffer
    http://xahlee.org/emacs/modernization_scratch_buffer.html

    In no way it sacrifices emacs operational efficiency. The proposal is
    careful thought out, so that in not only doesn't sacrifice emacs
    operational efficient in any possible way, but improve it, yet
    meanwhile makes it compatible with modern UI and intuitive to the
    masses.

    As for the Ctrl+n for New, it must be used in conjunction with the
    ergonomic keybinding set mentioned above.

    In the end, users can intuitive press Ctrl+n for creating a new file,
    one or multiple of it, can be used as elisp *scratch*, and can be set
    to default to any major mode, and can be saved by simply pressing Ctrl
    +s, and it will ask if user wants to save instead of like emacs
    *scratch* it risk losing data.

    > > is the suggestion of changing notation from C- and M- to Ctrl+ and Alt
    > > +, such that it reflects the lable on the keyboard, and Richard
    > > Stallman agrees may be a good idea, means it's Notepad?

    >
    > Nope, but I'm not sure if it's possible for emacs to get the right key.
    > Here, M is Alt, but Ctrl is indeed on the CapsLock key...
    >
    > And it makes key sequences much longer to write with little or no
    > benefit.


    What the **** r u talking about?? Really, what the **** are you
    talking about? Give concrete, specific point please.

    As for the CapsLock for Control, it's a industry myth. For detail,
    see:

    • Why You Should Not Swap Caps Lock With Control
    http://xahlee.org/emacs/swap_CapsLock_Ctrl.html

    > > is the suggestion of supporting html mail, and interface to gmail out
    > > of the box, means it's becoming Microsoft Notepad?

    >
    > Definitively not. AFAIK Gnus can handle gmail accounts quite well.


    Quite well my ass.

    Thank you for your feedback. I think it would be nice if you do some
    research on each particular issue. I can't spend my time to write
    detailed things to teach every poster. And i often have to repeat
    multiple times of the same issue. For example of a research, suppose
    you find my claim about Ctrl and Caps Lock switch incredible. Then,
    you can do research on this subject. Spending 1 hour on it, or days.
    You can go to library to research ergonomics, or ask professors, or
    try to hire experts for opinion, or set out experiments and test out
    hypothesis etc. For example, you can write a program to statistically
    log your keystroke, timing, etc. You can also set out key sequences
    set, A, and B, and type them for one hour each, to see which is
    causing your hand pain, etc.

    The above is just beginner suggestions, on one particular example of
    contention. On each and every issue, you can start a research.

    Btw, you are prob a typical tech geekers, where you don't understand
    nothing about research or social sciences. One short concrete advice i
    can give about your situation when researching, is not based on your
    views on slashdot, or the tech geeking blogs, or “my emacs buddies did
    this or that†type of thinking. Another concrete advices is that
    whatever you did for the research, must cost you. If it came easily
    without much cost, chances are, it's bullshit in your head. What dose
    cost mean? Ok, it means your time, for example. Are you, willing, to
    put aside say 10 hours of your time, on a issue mentioned here?
    Alternatively, say, are you willing, to spend $100 USD for research on
    particular issue we are debating here? For example, the money can be
    used to pay professional services that does research for you. It's
    probably peanuts and most such research services won't take. But it's
    a start on thinking. You can spend it on someone who are known expert
    for example. As a quick example, say you disbelieve one of my claim
    about ergonomics, then you can spend the $100 USD to say ask some
    known ergonomics expert to dinner or buy him beer, and ask about his
    opinion.

    I typed the above as fast as i can, just to give you some ideas. There
    are too many issues, aspects, technical, social, concrete,
    philosophical, that i can cover, and have written a lot in the past
    years. I can't repeat them all here, and frankly i discussed only a
    small part. But i hope you have some basic ideas about the issue.

    Love & knowledge,

    Xah
    ∑ http://xahlee.org/

    ☄
    Xah Lee, Feb 27, 2009
    #3
  4. Xah Lee

    Xah Lee Guest

    On Feb 26, 1:59 am, Tassilo Horn <> wrote:
    > Xah Lee <> writes:
    >
    > Hi Xah,
    >
    > > is the suggestion of using modern standard shortcut set of X C V for
    > > Cut, Copy, Paste, of which Linux uses, means it is turning emacs to a
    > > fancy Notepad clone?

    >
    > The functionality stays the same, but IMO it would confuse most users.
    > Killing is not cutting, yanking is not pasting. The whole concepts
    > (kill-ring vs. simple copy&paste) are much different.


    emacs's killing/yaning/kill-ring is basically the same idea as copy/
    cut/paste-board.

    Basically, emacs's pasteboard is just a extended version, such that it
    keeps a record of previous copied contents. To users, effectively,
    this means you can do paste-previous. That's all there is to it.

    So, it's brainless to make emacs intuitive to people and adopt modern
    UI standards. Basically, copy, cut, paste, is all the same, except in
    emacs you have also paste previous.

    > > Is fixing emacs's confusing undo and no redo, that is periodically
    > > bitched by programer in blogs, considered making emacs into a Notepad
    > > clone?

    >
    > It's much more advanced than the usual sequential undo, but I admit that
    > it can get confusing sometimes. So instead of dropping it I'd prefer to
    > think about a better UI for it.
    >
    > > Is the suggestion for a statistics based ergonomic keybinding design
    > > that are more faster to execute, easier on the fingers, and easier to
    > > remember, mean it is turning emacs to a fancy notepad clone?

    >
    > Users use different commands and your bindings may be better for you on
    > your querty keyboard, but I'm sure they're not on my German Dvorak Type
    > II keyboard.


    If your are on a special keyboard, you are on your own.

    The ergonomic keybinding

    • Ergoemacs Keybindings
    http://xahlee.org/emacs/ergonomic_emacs_keybinding.html

    plays well with modern UI in Windows, Mac, Linux. It improves emacs
    keybinding, but also support standard shortcut sets. In no way, it
    loses any emacs advantage, while, it makes emacs compatible and
    intuitive for vast majority of computer users, and improve efficiency
    for those heavy touch typists and programers who are into the concept
    of not leaving hands off the keyboard.

    > > is the suggestion of getting rid of *scratch* buffer, and introduce a
    > > command “New†with shortcut Ctrl+n, that creates new buffer anytime
    > > anywhere, which lets user create multiple scratch buffers defaulting
    > > to any mode and compatible for the rest of Linux's shortcuts, means it
    > > is a fancy Microsoft Notepad?

    >
    > Such a easy key like C-n is much too valuable for such a rarely used
    > command. C-x b foobar RET is ok, isn't it?


    This issues is discussed before in some hundred or 2 hundred thread in
    2008.

    the proposal in detail is here:

    • Suggestions on Emacs's Scratch Buffer
    http://xahlee.org/emacs/modernization_scratch_buffer.html

    In no way it sacrifices emacs operational efficiency. The proposal is
    careful thought out, so that in not only doesn't sacrifice emacs
    operational efficient in any possible way, but improve it, yet
    meanwhile makes it compatible with modern UI and intuitive to the
    masses.

    As for the Ctrl+n for New, it must be used in conjunction with the
    ergonomic keybinding set mentioned above.

    In the end, users can intuitive press Ctrl+n for creating a new file,
    one or multiple of it, can be used as elisp *scratch*, and can be set
    to default to any major mode, and can be saved by simply pressing Ctrl
    +s, and it will ask if user wants to save instead of like emacs
    *scratch* it risk losing data.

    > > is the suggestion of changing notation from C- and M- to Ctrl+ and Alt
    > > +, such that it reflects the lable on the keyboard, and Richard
    > > Stallman agrees may be a good idea, means it's Notepad?

    >
    > Nope, but I'm not sure if it's possible for emacs to get the right key.
    > Here, M is Alt, but Ctrl is indeed on the CapsLock key...
    >
    > And it makes key sequences much longer to write with little or no
    > benefit.


    What the **** r u talking about?? Really, what the **** are you
    talking about? Give concrete, specific point please.

    As for the CapsLock for Control, it's a industry myth. For detail,
    see:

    • Why You Should Not Swap Caps Lock With Control
    http://xahlee.org/emacs/swap_CapsLock_Ctrl.html

    > > is the suggestion of supporting html mail, and interface to gmail out
    > > of the box, means it's becoming Microsoft Notepad?

    >
    > Definitively not. AFAIK Gnus can handle gmail accounts quite well.


    Quite well my ass.

    Thank you for your feedback. I think it would be nice if you do some
    research on each particular issue. I can't spend my time to write
    detailed things to teach every poster. And i often have to repeat
    multiple times of the same issue. For example of a research, suppose
    you find my claim about Ctrl and Caps Lock switch incredible. Then,
    you can do research on this subject. Spending 1 hour on it, or days.
    You can go to library to research ergonomics, or ask professors, or
    try to hire experts for opinion, or set out experiments and test out
    hypothesis etc. For example, you can write a program to statistically
    log your keystroke, timing, etc. You can also set out key sequences
    set, A, and B, and type them for one hour each, to see which is
    causing your hand pain, etc.

    The above is just beginner suggestions, on one particular example of
    contention. On each and every issue, you can start a research.

    Btw, you are prob a typical tech geekers, where you don't understand
    nothing about research or social sciences. One short concrete advice i
    can give about your situation when researching, is not based on your
    views on slashdot, or the tech geeking blogs, or “my emacs buddies did
    this or that†type of thinking. Another concrete advices is that
    whatever you did for the research, must cost you. If it came easily
    without much cost, chances are, it's bullshit in your head. What dose
    cost mean? Ok, it means your time, for example. Are you, willing, to
    put aside say 10 hours of your time, on a issue mentioned here?
    Alternatively, say, are you willing, to spend $100 USD for research on
    particular issue we are debating here? For example, the money can be
    used to pay professional services that does research for you. It's
    probably peanuts and most such research services won't take. But it's
    a start on thinking. You can spend it on someone who are known expert
    for example. As a quick example, say you disbelieve one of my claim
    about ergonomics, then you can spend the $100 USD to say ask some
    known ergonomics expert to dinner or buy him beer, and ask about his
    opinion.

    I typed the above as fast as i can, just to give you some ideas. There
    are too many issues, aspects, technical, social, concrete,
    philosophical, that i can cover, and have written a lot in the past
    years. I can't repeat them all here, and frankly i discussed only a
    small part. But i hope you have some basic ideas about the issue.

    Love & knowledge,

    Xah
    ∑ http://xahlee.org/

    ☄

    ---------------------------


    On Feb 26, 3:23 am, Tassilo Horn <> wrote:
    > Klaus Straubinger <> writes:
    >
    > Hi Klaus,
    >
    > >> Reading HTML mail works nice, too (with emacs-w3m as helper). A
    > >> simple editor would be nice for some people, too. But I guess that
    > >> most current devs arent interested in writing one, cause in "the tech
    > >> geekers" world mail is in text/plain.

    >
    > > In Emacs, there is Enriched Mode if you want formatted text. The info
    > > file says

    >
    > > | "Enriched mode" is a minor mode for editing files that contain
    > > | formatted text in WYSIWYG fashion, as in a word processor. Currently,
    > > | formatted text in Enriched mode can specify fonts, colors, underlining,
    > > | margins, and types of filling and justification. In the future, we plan
    > > | to implement other formatting features as well.
    > > |
    > > | Enriched mode is a minor mode. It is typically used in conjunction
    > > | with Text mode, but you can also use it with other major modes such
    > > | as Outline mode and Paragraph-Indent Text mode.
    > > |
    > > | Potentially, Emacs can store formatted text files in various file
    > > | formats. Currently, only one format is implemented: "text/enriched"
    > > | format, which is defined by the MIME protocol.

    >
    > > One could write a converter to HTML if another format is desired.

    >
    > Yes, nice. I guess that would be possible without too much effort. So
    > Xah, why not do it yourself?


    Me?

    I started a project in Jan, called emacs2010. Here:

    http://code.google.com/p/emacs2010/

    You see, one of the things tech geekers do, is to throw piss around.
    So, instead of telling me something and something and something, for a
    change, why don't you join my project and contribute code, for the
    good of humanity? It's GPL, btw.

    With your approval, i'll add you as a member.

    Xah
    ∑ http://xahlee.org/

    ☄
    Xah Lee, Feb 27, 2009
    #4
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Ueland
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    997
    Ross Bamford
    Nov 1, 2005
  2. Dave
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    523
  3. shank

    how to do a cloud scene

    shank, May 9, 2004, in forum: HTML
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    607
    nice.guy.nige
    May 10, 2004
  4. Stephan Rose

    Scene Management

    Stephan Rose, Jul 19, 2003, in forum: C++
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    386
    Victor Bazarov
    Jul 19, 2003
  5. Xah Lee
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    318
    Xah Lee
    Feb 27, 2009
Loading...

Share This Page