Re: describe-bindings: ^L, bad order, naming

[Luc Teirlinck]

Drew Adams wrote:

   That might be OK, but I believe Outline mode can be a bit scary for
   newbies

Indeed.

David Reitter wrote, in response to Eli Zaretskii:

   On 11 Nov 2005, at 08:47, Eli Zaretskii wrote:

   > The ^L is there so that one could use forward-page to quickly move to
   > the next group.

   That's great, but it shouldn't be displayed.

If the ^L is not displayed, how do you know that forward-page will
move you there?

More importantly, what the ^L is _really_ there for is to force a page
break if the user prints the stuff off.  Obviously, it should be
displayed as is, because the user printing it off should know that
there is going a page break there.  He should be able to remove it
after C-x C-q if he does not want a page break there.  People who are
less comfortable with computers tend to print _more_ stuff to hardcopy
than advanced users and print off more plain text, which uses ^L for
page breaks.  They may not know the meaning of ^L the very first time
they print a buffer with ^L, but they will the second time, and then
they will start using it in their own buffers.

^L is by no means an obscure character, although it might be obscure
for people who never print plaintext buffers.  People who need to know
what the ^L means (people who want to print the stuff off) will know
what it means.  People who do not need to know it can either ignore
it, or check it up if they are curious (good for them), but I do not
see how it can really harm them.

   > We could use overlays to display the ^L as something more visually
   > appealing, while leaving ^L in the buffer.

Definitely not, for the reasons above.  If there is a ^L in the buffer,
the user needs to know that.

Sincerely,

Luc.