Subject: bug#24902: 25.1; C-x = for Unicode

From: Mattias Engdegård <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2022 18:29:22 +0100

24 jan. 2022 kl. 17.35 skrev Lars Ingebrigtsen <[email-masked]>:

> I think using `format-spec' would allow users to tweak this more
> extensively, which they probably want to, if they care enough to change
> it at all.

Thanks for taking a look! I had a go at format-spec, and don't think it's appropriate. Let me explain:

1. It doesn't fit the problem very well: neither the traditional nor the new format are easily expressed with format-spec since they are conditional in several ways (fields or strings that appear depending on the circumstances). In contrast, conditions are easily expressible in Lisp.

2. Even if we went through the contortions to make formats expressible in format-spec, it still wouldn't be very easy to do so, especially compared to choosing a ready-made format. For more advanced customisation, Lisp is probably preferable.

3. As any designer knows, customisability is a cop-out: it's an abdication of responsibility. The user can now conveniently be blamed for any perceived shortcoming. Conversely, being forced to think and make hard choices is much of what design is about, and users like when it's done for them in a competent way.

Customisability is a minefield: it is often motivated by vague hypotheticals like "what if someone wants to..." when the right question to ask is instead what a good design would be and what preferences, if any, could reasonably differ.

Let's look at it this way: what would you personally want the format to be, if you did not need to think about anyone else's wishes? Then see if our ideas might converge. Chances are that we could find something that most users think is pretty good, and many of the rest could very well live with.