The Modernization of Emacs: terminology buffer and keybinding

[Martin Gregorie]

BartlebyScrivener wrote:
> On Jun 22, 3:47 pm, Twisted <twisted... at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> If it requires years of mastery, it is clunky
> 
> Well, now you keep harping on this, but it's just not true.
> 
> I use vim myself, but for purposes of this argument it doesn't matter.
> If you take the Vim tutorial and use the help (which appears in a
> split window anytime you want it), you can use Vim like any other text
> editor within a day or so, especially if you use Cream, which is set
> up to hold your Windows hands and act like any other Windows text
> editor on the surface. But if you use Vim for YEARS you get better and
> faster and more efficient precisely BECAUSE of its arcane
> capabilities. If you are going to keep your hands on the keyboard
> where they belong, if you REALLY want to go fast, then there's no
> alternative to having complex key commands, which become second nature
> over time, and take the place of repetitive, totally inefficient
> mousing around.
> 
> You might enjoy this. Especially the link to an old essay called
> "Interface Zen"
> 
> http://tinyurl.com/2da3om
>
A good reference. Thanks.

I like Interface Zen - much sense there.

However, there's a case he missed, probably through never using a CAD 
system. All the good ones can be driven either by mouse, or by 
non-chorded key sequences or any combo the user likes. The essence of 
CAD is very accurate pointing but all too many mice move slightly when 
clicked. Fortunately a decent CAD system offers the possibility of 
purely pointing with the mouse and doing everything else with the other 
hand on the keyboard. The result is both fast and extremely accurate.

An interface design point that nobody has yet mentioned here is that 
there are four different types of user that map onto a grid:

		casual	dedicated
untrained	1	2
expert		3	4

I first ran across grid this in "Design of Man-Computer Dialogs" by 
James Martin and its been very useful in systems interface design.

The problem with almost all current GUIs is that they are aimed at types 
1 and 3 users - this certainly applies to Windows, OS X and Gnome 
desktops with the emphasis on type 1. vi and microEmacs, OTOH, are aimed 
at type 3 and 4 users.

Where does emacs fit on this grid? My guess would be 3 and 4.

Its very difficult indeed to design an interface that suits both 
untrained and expert users. About the closest I've seen have been 
keyboard driven menu structures which have been designed so the user can 
build their own "command sequences" that traverse menu levels without 
showing the menus, as long as items are selected correctly from each 
level. Many CAD systems approximate to this but I've yet to see a 
graphical desktop, IDE, or editor menu structure that came close.


-- 
martin@   | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org       |