From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tim Cross Subject: Re: customizing Org for legibility Date: Sun, 02 Feb 2020 13:02:22 +1100 Message-ID: <87wo95iw5t.fsf@gmail.com> References: <87sgjuuvrv.fsf@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:57558) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iy4ak-00060t-Sq for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sat, 01 Feb 2020 21:02:31 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iy4aj-0005xo-KG for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sat, 01 Feb 2020 21:02:30 -0500 Received: from mail-pf1-x430.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::430]:37533) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iy4aj-0005v2-Cn for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sat, 01 Feb 2020 21:02:29 -0500 Received: by mail-pf1-x430.google.com with SMTP id p14so5570374pfn.4 for ; Sat, 01 Feb 2020 18:02:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from tim-desktop (203-173-19-246.dyn.iinet.net.au. [203.173.19.246]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 196sm15384288pfy.86.2020.02.01.18.02.25 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Sat, 01 Feb 2020 18:02:27 -0800 (PST) In-reply-to: <87sgjuuvrv.fsf@gmail.com> List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sender: "Emacs-orgmode" To: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Good points Jack - I was going to post something similar. There are many who use terminal mode for all sorts of reasons which may not be obvious and which is not just sys admin work. For example, people who like to use tmux or do pair programming (or paired writing, such as for co-authoring of papers, presentations etc). Spacemacs has been growing in popularity for this as well. My concern here is that we are very much moving into aesthetics and personal taste. I'm largely with Jack in that I prefer fixed width fonts. While I agree that variable pitch can make some text look better, I find the additional complication this brings wrt formatting and consistent presentation outweighs the small visual improvements. For similar reasons, I never use visual-line-mode. I'm not saying we should not have 'mixed' fonts. However, we do need to ensure this is optional and that it is thoroughly tested - for example, many people have customised Agenda views. There has been discussion around how variable pitch can work, but these tend to focus on the 'default' agenda. It is important to be mindful of such assumptions in order to recognise where changes will need to be implemented as options you can select rather than defaults you must disable. It has been some years since I have done anything with Emacs' customize interface and in particular, custom-face settings, but from memory, it allowed you to set defaults for both GUI and text based consoles, so it should be possible to do things in a way which work for both environments. Jack Kamm writes: >> One thing I don't understand: It seems that GUI and terminal modes are >> completely different. Rather than constrain GUI defaults to terminal >> limitations, it makes sense to gracefully degrade them when a terminal >> is detected. I assume that terminal users don't care about variable >> pitch. They're likely doing sysadmin, with little or no prose >> interaction. > > Personally, I run emacs in daemon mode, and often have both GUI and > terminal emacsclients connected to the same session. So I like to have > settings that work well in both. > > I agree terminal users typically won't want variable pitch, but disagree > that they are generally doing sysadmin -- I know users who use org-mode > for their notes, but prefer to use emacs in the terminal. > > Speaking to my own preferences -- I prefer fixed-width for editing text, > whether it's prose or code. For example, if I execute a command to move > the cursor down 10 lines, I like to know where my cursor is going to end > up. Fixed-width also works better for certain editing commands, such as > rectangle commands. > > I am not sure what the majority preference is here, but it would be > interesting to know, and also how it distributes across old-timers and > newcomers. Ideally, it should be easy to accommodate all preferences, > with a small amount of configuration and easily discoverable > documentation. -- Tim Cross