"A.W." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: [snip]
> Basically, I think it's very important to me right now, and I don't > like change(autistic(and lazy)). > Please continue improving Conkeror, and please keep the > splitting/multibuffers. Note that I was not suggesting the possibility of removing the capability of having multiple buffers in a window --- since that is already implemented, even though I don't use it myself, I certainly don't it expect it would go away. Likewise, although in Emacs the minibuffer is in some sense just a normal buffer, in Conkeror it is handled separately, and also isn't going away. Rather, I was asking about how useful a potential new feature of allowing multiple "panes" in a single top-level window in the same way that you can create multiple "windows" (in Emacs terminology) in a single top-level frame (in Emacs terminology) using e.g. C-x 2 and C-x 3. (Although Conkeror originally used Emacs terminology of "frame" meaning a top-level window, I have since changed it to use the more conventional terminology of a top-level window being called a window, and reserving the term "pane" to be equivalent to a "window" in Emacs terminology. This was done because the word "frame" is already commonly used in web browsers to mean an embedded web page inside another, created using e.g. IFRAME or FRAMSET elements, and it seemed quite desirable to allow the term "frame" to refer unambiguously to a (possibly embedded) content web page.) -- Jeremy Maitin-Shepard _______________________________________________ Conkeror mailing list [email protected] https://www.mozdev.org/mailman/listinfo/conkeror
