[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Groff] Status of the portability work, and plans for the future
From: |
Jon Snader |
Subject: |
Re: [Groff] Status of the portability work, and plans for the future |
Date: |
Tue, 9 Jan 2007 13:29:42 -0500 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.4.2.2i |
On Tue, Jan 09, 2007 at 12:03:14PM -0500, Eric S. Raymond wrote:
>
> Your thinking is intelligent and cogent -- but your factual
> premise is wrong, leading you to an incorrect model of my
> assumptions. On my usual desktop arrangement, rendering man
> pages in a browser *would* in fact have the cost of popping up
> a browser. It is indicative that I don't have one up right
> now.
>
I stand corrected on your desktop set up, but I'm willing to
concede only half the point. With your desktop, calling up a man
page from your editor would cause a browser to pop up. That's a
little distracting, perhaps, but not nearly so much as having to
switch desktops.
> > One could argue, I suppose, that this just
> > shows that ESR is correct and we should
> > stick to a single window, but there's a
> > whole bunch of us who disagree.
>
> Heh. For the record, "ESR" himself wouldn't make that
> argument. :-)
>
I was a sloppy here. What I meant is a single *virtual desktop*,
not a single application window.
>
> You skipped a step. You have a good point about calling up
> manual pages within an editor, but not all character-cell
> displays are equivalent; it doesn't follow from this that
> man(1) through xterm has any value that lynx(1) through xterm
> wouldn't. I'll be interested to see if you can make that
> argument, especially since Gunnar ducked it.
>
I think someone made (almost) that argument earlier. That person
posted that man with less was more convenient and powerful (?)
than a browser because of navigation and searching issues.
Regarding man/less vs. lynx, I would have to agree. Let's face
it, lynx navigation sucks and the only benefit that I can see is
that you get hyperlinks. I'm not sure (admittedly because I
haven't had the ability) that hyperlinks make up for the loss of
easy navigation and searching. But, really, I think that misses
the point. I doubt anyone would prefer lynx/xterm over, say,
firefox for viewing man pages. The question is whether there are
some situations in which a traditional man page rendered in a
character display makes sense. For me, and I think many others,
getting a man page in an editor window does make sense and I
wouldn't want to lose that ability. When I'm looking at a man
page for, say, bogofilter, then a browser based display would
probably be preferable because I'm not already in my editor.
> Until somebody meets that challenge, I'll stick with my
> diagnosis of arrested development.
It's not arrested development to prefer to retain a useful
capability (man pages in an editor) rather than move to a browser
based system whose main benefit is hyperlinks. Especially if you
don't think hyperlinks are particularly valuable for the types of
man pages you typically bring up in an editor.
> It's not one I make casually -- I've been thinking *hard* about
> Unix UI, from a position deep within Unix culture, for half a
> decade now.
I know you have; let me say again that I approve of this project
and appreciate your efforts on its behalf.
jcs
- Re: [Groff] Status of the portability work, and plans for the future, (continued)
- Re: [Groff] Status of the portability work, and plans for the future, Gunnar Ritter, 2007/01/08
- Re: [Groff] Status of the portability work, and plans for the future, Eric S. Raymond, 2007/01/08
- Re: [Groff] Status of the portability work, and plans for the future, Gunnar Ritter, 2007/01/09
- Re: [Groff] Status of the portability work, and plans for the future, Eric S. Raymond, 2007/01/09
- Re: [Groff] Status of the portability work, and plans for the future, Gunnar Ritter, 2007/01/09
- Re: [Groff] Status of the portability work, and plans for the future, Jon Snader, 2007/01/09
- Re: [Groff] Status of the portability work, and plans for the future, Eric S. Raymond, 2007/01/09
- Re: [Groff] Status of the portability work, and plans for the future, Joerg van den Hoff, 2007/01/09
- Re: [Groff] Status of the portability work, and plans for the future, Eric S. Raymond, 2007/01/09
- Re: [Groff] Status of the portability work, and plans for the future, Michael Parson, 2007/01/10
- Re: [Groff] Status of the portability work, and plans for the future,
Jon Snader <=
- Re: [Groff] Status of the portability work, and plans for the future, Eric S. Raymond, 2007/01/09
- Re: [Groff] Status of the portability work, and plans for the future, Jon Snader, 2007/01/09
- Re: [Groff] Status of the portability work, and plans for the future, Gunnar Ritter, 2007/01/10
- Re: [Groff] Status of the portability work, and plans for the future, Eric S. Raymond, 2007/01/10
- Re: [Groff] Status of the portability work, and plans for the future, Larry Kollar, 2007/01/10
- Re: [Groff] Status of the portability work, and plans for the future, Larry Kollar, 2007/01/10
- Re: [Groff] Status of the portability work, and plans for the future, Werner LEMBERG, 2007/01/08
Re: [Groff] Status of the portability work, and plans for the future, Werner LEMBERG, 2007/01/08