Lars Ingebrigtsen writes: > Mauro Aranda writes: > >> I suppose we could stop overriding the :format property, but for some >> widgets overriding it might make sense. For example, for the choice >> widget, deleting the :format value-format line would create the >> following: >> >> Foo: Choice: [Value Menu] The-Tag: >> >> Which isn't good, IMO. > > Yeah, that doesn't look optimal... Earlier today I sent a message saying we already show it that way when the choice widget is part of another grouping widget. And I can't figure out a nice way to show it, while being backward compatible... So I suggest the attached patch, and if the Choice: [Value Menu] text turns out to be really annoying, we can explore some other way of fixing it. (If you want, I can send a tentative untested example of how a less backward compatible change would look like). >> Other customization types I can think of that we should pay attention >> if we go with this change would be: repeat, set and radio. >> >> I think that those three, if we print their tag, won't give too much >> valuable information about the variable. I mean, we'd end up with >> something like this: >> >> Foo: Repeat: >> [INS] [DEL] Something >> [INS] >> >> And any user may ask what does "repeat" mean. Maybe changing the tags >> to something slightly more useful is all we need, and with this change >> the Custom buffer will show the customization type of the variable to >> the user, which looks like a win to me. > > Sounds good to me, if I understand you correctly (which I may very well > not do). Similarly to the choice widget, we already show "Repeat" and such things in other situations, so I'd say my initial worries should not be taken into account.