Re: eww

[Bastien]

Richard Stallman <address@hidden> writes:

> [[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider    ]]]
> [[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies,     ]]]
> [[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]
>
>     `browse-web' is the alias for `eww'.
>
> That's a good, natural name.  However, the Emacs manual mentions
> `eww', not `browse-web'.  I think that is a bug and needs to be
> fixed.

Before we go and fix the manual, I think the way people chose
the program for browsing the web can be made simpler.

Having both `browse-url' and `browse-web' is confusing IMHO.

What about:

1. replace the `browse-web' alias with `emacs-web-browser'.

2. let `browse-url' use `browse-url-graphical' or `browse-url-text'
   depending on whether (display-graphic-p) and on a a user option
   (if the user always want to use a text browser, for example.)

3. set the options `browse-url-graphical-alternatives' and
   `browse-url-text-alternatives' with `define-alternatives'
   which would offer relevant choices depending on what the user
   can use on its system.

When hitting `browse-url' for the first time in a terminal, the user
would have the choice between eww, w3 or w3m, for example.

When hitting `browse-url' for the first time in a window system,
the user would first have the choice to browse with a text browser,
or a window browser, then between (text or window) browsers.

C-u M-x browse-url RET would let him pick up another alternative
by passing the prefix universal argument to browse-url-graphical
or browse-url-text (for now the prefix tells whether to open a
new window/tab in the browser.)

It's probably a lot of work, but it would makes life easier for
users.  For now they rely on `browse-url' and will hardly hear
of `browse-web', wondering why there is a separate interface.

-- 
 Bastien