[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Proposal to improve the nomenclature of scrolling directions

From: Dani Moncayo
Subject: Re: Proposal to improve the nomenclature of scrolling directions
Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2012 18:30:52 +0100

>> I disagree: IMHO, the words that best describe the direction of a
>> _vertical_ movement are precisely "up" and "down", and are they are
>> used elsewhere for this very purpose.
> Yes, up and down describe vertical movement, but as the whole thread
> shows, they do not clearly say what is moving, so both readings are
> possible.

As I said, with my proposal it is clear what part regarded as the
"moving one": the view.  The documentation would be updated to state
this clearly, and also the command names, which explicitly mention the
moving part (e.g. "scroll-view-down").  So the ambiguity would removed
and a single (standard) criterion would be adopted.

> move-point-towards-end-of-buffer* and
> move-point-towards-beginning-of-buffer* are unambiguos.

Vertical (or horizontal) scrolling doesn't necessarily imply moving
the point.  What is moving is the view relative to the text (or
vice-versa), and as I said, IMO the cleaner way to express that should
include the "moving" part (i.e. the view) and the direction

Hence my proposal: scroll-view-up, scroll-view-down etc.

Dani Moncayo

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]