Subject: Re: bug#51217: 28.0.60; Use "graphical displays" instead of "X terminals" in docs

From: Eli Zaretskii <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2021 09:46:23 +0300

> From: Stefan Kangas <[email-masked]>
> Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2021 16:45:57 -0700
> 
> In (info "(elisp) Other Char Bits"), I read:
> 
>     Emacs uses the 2**25 bit to indicate that the shift key
>     was used in typing a control character.  This distinction is possible
>     only when you use X terminals or other special terminals; ordinary text
>     terminals do not report the distinction.
> 
> Can we change "when you use X terminals or other special terminals" to
> "on a graphical display"?

Something like that, yes.

> -Ordinary text terminals have no way of generating non-@acronym{ASCII}
> -control characters, but you can generate them straightforwardly using
> -X and other window systems.
> +Text terminals have no way of generating non-@acronym{ASCII} control
> +characters, but you can generate them straightforwardly using X and
> +other window systems.

I think this paragraph is no longer true, at least not universally, on
modern text-mode terminals -- assuming we include text-terminal
emulators.  So I suggest to say something like

  Not all text terminals have a way of generating non-@acronym{ASCII}
  control characters, but you can generate them straightforwardly
  using X and other window systems.

>  bit to indicate that the shift key was used in typing a control
> -character.  This distinction is possible only when you use X terminals
> -or other special terminals; ordinary text terminals do not report the
> -distinction.  The Lisp syntax for the shift bit is @samp{\S-}; thus,
> -@samp{?\C-\S-o} or @samp{?\C-\S-O} represents the shifted-control-o
> -character.
> +character.  This distinction is possible only on a graphical display;

I'd prefer to keep the reference to X, something like

  This distinction is possible only when you use a graphical display,
  such as a GUI display on X.

> -;; Many people are used to typing C-/ on X terminals and getting C-_.
> +;; Many people are used to typing C-/ on graphical displays and getting C-_.

In code comments, I'd prefer to use "GUI frames" instead.  it's
shorter and more accurate, IMO.

> -  ;; many people are used to type `C-/' on X terminals and get `C-_'.
> +  ;; many people are used to type `C-/' on graphical displays and get `C-_'.

Likewise.

Thanks.