bug#49050: 26.1; The INSANITY of setting a default font size in EMACS and saving it for future instances.

[Christopher Dimech]

> Sent: Friday, June 18, 2021 at 6:48 AM
> From: "Jeff B" <Jeff_B.atHome@clowderHouse.net>
> To: "Christopher Dimech" <dimech@gmx.com>, "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz@gnu.org>
> Cc: 49050@debbugs.gnu.org
> Subject: Re: bug#49050: 26.1; The INSANITY of setting a default font size in 
> EMACS and saving it for future instances.
>
> 
> My response is down below at the end.
> 
> >>>> Such changes in the defaults will need to be requested by much more
> >>>> than a single individual, for them to be considered seriously.
> >> Why me?  I have enough on my plate already, and starting a discussion
> >> needs neither my consent nor my help.
> > On 6/17/21 10:13 AM, Christopher Dimech wrote:
> >
> > So me starting a discussion does not require your consent nor your help.
> > I shall take you up on that and start discussing.
> >
> > The suggestion was mainly driven by the previous comment that my requests 
> > are not
> > considered seriously.  This is not always a healthy solution to inactivity.
> >
> >> The decision to add an "Accessibility" toggle, which is off by
> >> default, is a much easier one, and given that someone writes the code,
> >> should be a no-brainer to install.  No discussion is needed for that.
> > Let's do the no-brainer and see how that goes.  An accessibility option is 
> > good,
> > but need an easy way to enable it after installing emacs.  I suggest an
> > "Initial Option" such as "emacs -A", together with an elisp command
> > "(accessibility 1)".
> >
> > Jeff, what do you think about this?  Would it be a good 70th birthday 
> > present?
> >
> > Felicitations
> > Christopher
> 
> Since you ask I will answer.
> 
> • I would NOT use an Initial Option such as "emacs -A" because that
>     means that you would have had to read the man page to know that
>     -the A option is there.  The Emacs 26.1 man page is already 473
>     lines long.  If someone is having a hard time seeing to begin with
>     then expecting them to read their way through all that to look for
>     something they don't know is there is not exactly
>     accessibility-friendly.

There could be "emacs -h" telling you about the options.  Still, you do not
like the loads of information about emacs to be useful to you.  So let's not
demand a month of reading to enable accessibility.
 
> • Instead I would add an accessibility item either as an item to the
>     Options menu or, better still, add it as a separate item to the menu
>     bar.  That would make it easy to stumble upon.  :-)

That is good plan.  Although lately there has been a freak show by those
who do not many any menu bar my default.  I disagreed at the time, and still
do.  Not having the menu is tho same as saying "read the fucking 473 page 
manual".

It really should be in the menu under heading "Accessibility".
 
> • Which brings me to another point.  I accept that I probably have
>     some weirdness in my environment which causes Save Options to
>     fail, so solving that problem is probably on me.  BUT since saving
>     options has never worked for me I am particularly sensitive to the
>     issue of saving options.
> 
>     As I understand it (because it has never worked for me) to save
>     options chosen one not only has to make changes somewhere under
>     the Options item but then one has to re-enter the Options menu and
>     explicitly save the changes.  If it were up to me I'd reorganize that
>     so that each Options menu item had Cancel, Apply and Save buttons
>     so that you can save right then and there.
> 
>     HOWEVER I recognize that would be a major refactoring of the code
>     (I have been a hard-core programmer all of my professional life!)
>     which would take a lot of work so it probably won't happen.  BUT, as
>     I said, if it were up to me I'd do it.

The conclusion is that you would do it, and that emacs developers should do it.
I can agree with that.
 
> • Responding to a comment in an earlier eMail, YES, the default font
>     size IS TOO SMALL to be accessibility-friendly.  It is far easier for
>     a person who has good vision to make the text smaller than it is for
>     a vision-impaired person to make the text bigger.

Quite right.  The font size is too small.  In newspaper publishing, 65 
characters
are normally put in a single line.  I would like that emacs does the same (and 
then
peaple can reduce that).  It also solved the problem with small screens, which 
I use
when I am on the road.
 
> I know all about wanting to cram more lines and columns of code into
> a frame.  I used to have 20/20 vision and made the characters as small
> as possible so I could have more lines of code visible on my screen at
> any one time.  Then I got older and, as happens to many people, I lost
> my ability to focus rather suddenly at about 45 years of age. Assuming
> that you do make it to "older", then you may also discover, personally,
> how important accessibility features really are.  So I urge you to get
> them in place BEFORE you need them, and in the meantime making it
> easier for all of the people who already have sight impairment.

I agree, we should assume that getting older imposes some further emacs
capabilities that are easy to use. 

> Thank you,
> Jeff Barry
> Old Fart and Curmudgeon-In-Training

It would help immensely if a number of other Old Fart friends comment
on our discussion.  The comments would help the emacs developer community to 
understand the importance of what the older members would find of value.

There will be a time when they realise the difficulties, but would be a shame
if the changes take 20 years.
 
> PS: Fix the EMACS documentation problem with jargon too!
 
Makes sense to me too.  I have been getting strong opposition to that.
The debate is usually born out of experience.  But with time, it has ended
up to be an intellectual trap, and some want to warn the world about it.

Thank you so very much.
Christopher