Re: lax matching is not a great default behavior

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2015 13:04:24 +0100
> From: Per Starbäck <address@hidden>
> Cc: John Wiegley <address@hidden>, address@hidden, Drew Adams 
> <address@hidden>, 
>       "address@hidden" <address@hidden>
> 
> > Try more serious editing environments.  E.g., MS Word does that by
> > default.
> 
> I don't have access to MS Word, I don't think experiences from that
> influences what users expect in an editor much, and I think it is
> beside the point anyway. A good feature is good anyway.

Given the sheer number of people who use (or have to use) Word, this
is hardly beside the point.

> > The entire time interval between Nov 15 this year and until we release
> > Emacs 25.1 (which will take a few months, probably more than 6,
> > judging by past experience) is supposed to provide that feedback.
> 
> The main feedback won't come until after it is available in a released 
> version.

I disagree.  I've seen that happening during pretest many times.
Heck, even the discussion we are having now is part of that feedback.
And I don't expect it to be the last discussion about this.

> What we were talking about is what should be the default in the next
> released version. Since you are instead talking about the default
> *before release* we are maybe not in disagreement after all.

For now, the release is still so far away that any difference between
these 2 alternatives is indiscernible, IMO.

> >> I may have missed something, but I have not read a single "I think
> >> it's wrong" post.
> >
> > Any post that doesn't explain why folding characters might be _wrong_
> > in _most_ situations is not providing any useful arguments for turning
> > off the default.  Most posts I've seen explained why their authors
> > don't like this feature.
> 
> Big problems are big even if they only affect 5% of the users.

Yes, but we don't change the defaults on behalf of such a small
minority, except to prevent a disaster.  I see no disaster in this
case.

> The example I have given where this feature for Scandinavians is
> like having a search for "I" find "J" is such a problem.

Not "for Scandinavians", in text written in one of the Scandinavian
languages.  Right?

> That just isn't acceptable, and will affect _most_ editing session
> for some, but of course not _most_ situations for all users
> combined.

Then these users will customize their Emacs, and move on.

> Some adaptations by language are needed to make this a
> good feature, and that won't be there in place for the next release,
> and also we won't know which adaptations are needed for other
> languages until more get to use this.

Indeed.  But I don't see that as a sufficient reason to decide now
that the default should off for _everyone_.

> And this is strange. I haven't read a single such post, and yet it's
> most posts you have seen. I wonder if you have read that into any post
> by me.

I read everything that is posted to this list.

> Emacs as a whole is American-centered

Emacs ceased being American-centered long ago, around v20.1, I'd say,
if not earlier.

> Its understanding of the needs for other languages that don't use a
> Latin script has earlier proved to be a better than its
> understanding of the needs for other languages using a Latin script.

If you really think that, I'd encourage bug reports about any feature
or misfeature where this attitude is visible in practice.

> The harder you have to type áàẩããǎ the better it is for you to be
> able to search for them easily when they happen to be in a buffer.

There was at least one opposite view expressed in this discussion.
Which just tells us that one size will not fit all in the is regard,
there's nothing new.  But it tells nothing about which default is more
correct.  The default you propose has disadvantages, not just
advantages.