Re: describe-bindings: ^L, bad order, naming

[David Reitter]

On 11 Nov 2005, at 20:49, Luc Teirlinck wrote:
> ^L is by no means an obscure character, although it might be obscure
> for people who never print plaintext buffers.

I just typed   ^L in Google and I couldn't find the meaning.
I tried to use the Help menu to find it in the Emacs manual,  to no  
avail. (Maybe I didn't search correctly, but I did what a naive user  
would do.).
I also checked "Emacs Terminology" and couldn't find it.

Sorry to say, but yes, it is obscure.

Something like this is - nowadays - displayed in a graphical way.

> > We could use overlays to display the ^L as something more visually
> > appealing, while leaving ^L in the buffer.
>
> Definitely not, for the reasons above.  If there is a ^L in the  
> buffer,
> the user needs to know that.

Why does he need to know?
Doesn't a dashed horizontal line suggest that there's a page break  
much better than a ^L?

Divider lines exist because they visually divide something. That  
helps me analyze the structure of a document more quickly.
A ^L doesn't divide anything visually.