On Thu, 23 Jun 2005 11:31:01 +0900, you wrote: >Yeah I kind of assumed that. My question was more as to how you know >what "they" want/like[*]. It seems reasonably clear that the >different models will lead to some confusion when switching between >them, but is there really evidence of some inherent preference? > >It seems to me that both models are convenient/comforting in some >situations and annoying/restrictive in others.
I can see that my original point really did not come through. Let me try again... I think that we are doing a poor job of seducing CUA-reared would-be users into Emacs-hood by grafting-on a CUA-like menu facade when the very first menu likely to be invoked exposes our neophytes to a false similarity. Rather than argue about which common CUA name most closely matches some Emacs function that we feel we need to expose, a way to truly proper matches would be to think about how we might modify Emacs -- which we boast to ourselves is so infinitely malleable -- so that it might present truly CUA-like behavior. If one accepts this premise then some amount of reflecting on where presently insurmountable mismatches exist and what extensions might allow Emacs to overcome those mismatches is in order. Hence my original -- though admittedly flawed -- proposal. /john _______________________________________________ Emacs-devel mailing list Emacs-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel