[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: The minibuffer vs. Dialog Boxes (Re: Making XEmacs be more up-to-dat
From: |
Alfred M. Szmidt |
Subject: |
Re: The minibuffer vs. Dialog Boxes (Re: Making XEmacs be more up-to-date) |
Date: |
21 Apr 2002 13:37:22 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2.50 |
* Terje Bless writes:
> You choose your level of abstraction based on the vocabulary of your
> audience. We aren't talking about people interested in "biology"
> here; we're talking about a patient seeing a doctor. Talking about
> the implementation and demanding familiarity with terminology is
> fine for budding Emacs _developers_, but it's (IMO) inappropriate
> for people who merely want to /use/ Emacs to perform some task. If
> my doctor told me I had an inflamed pharynx I wouldn't know what the
> hell he was talking about. A sore throat OTOH is perfectly
> understandable and is probably accurate _enough_ under the
> circumstances.
Since when do you choose your level of abstraction based on the vocabulary of
your audience? You choose if based on what makes sense. In our case, a buffer
makes a perfectly good choice for a word, as you are not really opening a file,
you are opening a temporary file, a buffer. I really don't see what this
has to do with developers, what about people that have just /used/ Emacs since
a decade back? Or people that have /used/ it for a couple of years? A lot
of old timers would get pretty confused if you change the terminology. And
the glossary in the Emacs manual is something that new users should read. I
also think that the tutorial describes what a buffer is in words that are
suiting new users. Instead of changing the terminology why not improve the
definition of it so that it is easier to understand.
--
Alfred M. Szmidt
- Re: The minibuffer vs. Dialog Boxes (Re: Making XEmacs be more up-to-date), (continued)
- Re: The minibuffer vs. Dialog Boxes (Re: Making XEmacs be more up-to-date), Andreas Schwab, 2002/04/20
- Re: The minibuffer vs. Dialog Boxes (Re: Making XEmacs be more up-to-date), Michael Toomim, 2002/04/20
- Re: The minibuffer vs. Dialog Boxes (Re: Making XEmacs be more up-to-date), Kyle Jones, 2002/04/20
- Re: The minibuffer vs. Dialog Boxes (Re: Making XEmacs be more up-to-date), Terje Bless, 2002/04/20
- Re: The minibuffer vs. Dialog Boxes (Re: Making XEmacs be more up-to-date), Michael Toomim, 2002/04/20
- Re: The minibuffer vs. Dialog Boxes (Re: Making XEmacs be more up-to-date), Miles Bader, 2002/04/20
- Re: The minibuffer vs. Dialog Boxes (Re: Making XEmacs be more up-to-date), Nix, 2002/04/20
- Re: The minibuffer vs. Dialog Boxes (Re: Making XEmacs be more up-to-date), Eli Zaretskii, 2002/04/21
- Re: The minibuffer vs. Dialog Boxes (Re: Making XEmacs be more up-to-date), Alfred M. Szmidt, 2002/04/20
- Re: The minibuffer vs. Dialog Boxes (Re: Making XEmacs be more up-to-date), Terje Bless, 2002/04/20
- Re: The minibuffer vs. Dialog Boxes (Re: Making XEmacs be more up-to-date),
Alfred M. Szmidt <=
- Re: The minibuffer vs. Dialog Boxes (Re: Making XEmacs be more up-to-date), Michael Toomim, 2002/04/20
- Re: The minibuffer vs. Dialog Boxes (Re: Making XEmacs be more up-to-date), Alfred M. Szmidt, 2002/04/21
- Re: The minibuffer vs. Dialog Boxes (Re: Making XEmacs be more up-to-date), Terje Bless, 2002/04/21
- Re: The minibuffer vs. Dialog Boxes (Re: Making XEmacs be more up-to-date), Alfred M. Szmidt, 2002/04/21
- Re: The minibuffer vs. Dialog Boxes (Re: Making XEmacs be more up-to-date), Robert J. Chassell, 2002/04/21
- Re: The minibuffer vs. Dialog Boxes (Re: Making XEmacs be more up-to-date), Alfred M. Szmidt, 2002/04/21
- Re: The minibuffer vs. Dialog Boxes (Re: Making XEmacs be more up-to-date), Terje Bless, 2002/04/20
- Re: The minibuffer vs. Dialog Boxes (Re: Making XEmacs be more up-to-date), Serge Wroclawski, 2002/04/20
- Re: The minibuffer vs. Dialog Boxes (Re: Making XEmacs be more up-to-date), Brady Montz, 2002/04/20
- Re: The minibuffer vs. Dialog Boxes (Re: Making XEmacs be more up-to-date), Matt Tucker, 2002/04/20