meaning of "horizontally" and "vertically"

[MarianoAbsatz]

Is it only me?

by "split horizontally" I understand that I cut the terminal using a HORIZONTAL line and "split vertically" is cut it using a VERTICAL line...

however, Terminator 0.8.1 (the first one I try) does just the opposite... Is this a bug or a misunderstanding on my part?

I've been trying to remember a tool that does this and found out that vim works the way... the default split ^Ws is horizontal and there's a "vertical split" (^Wv) where the current window is split "vertically" giving you a "left" and a "right" one (whereas terminator's "vertical split" gives me an "upper" and a "lower" one).

[chantra (chantra)]

Hi Mariano,

This is right, I double check the behaviour on kate and split vertically will add a VPaned.

I guess we should stick with the same behaviour than other application to for HIM sake

[Chris Jones (cmsj)]

I think we looked at this on IRC and vim/emacs behave in opposite ways, and that we currently match emacs.
I think we also decided we were all vim users and so swapping the behaviour was best.

I'm a little unsure about it though, especially for reasons such as the current version in hardy being around for a few years. I'd be annoyed if I was switching between 8.04 and 8.10 machines and the behaviour was opposite. Maybe we are stuck with what we have, or should at least wait for Terminator 1.0 to be out before switching?

[Emilio Pozuelo Monfort (pochu)]

The other option is to change this now and backport the change to Hardy (I use the shortcuts to split Terminator though so I'm not very affected by this (-: )

[Philipp Kern (pkern)]

When I want a vertical split I choose that menu item and it gives me a horizontal one. Sorry, but that is very confusing in 0.8.1.

[Christer Edwards (christer.edwards)]

It seems reversed to me as well. with 'split vertically' I would expect a vertical line created, and the same for horizontal. It seems backwards and unintuitive.

[Edoardo Batini (edoardo-batini)]

Same for me. I'd prefer opposite behaviour as it seems to be more common. People get used very quickly...

[Chris Jones (cmsj)]

Given that lots of people have asked for the behaviour to change and basically nobody has defended the existing behaviour, I am prepared to switch it around.

However, as I stated previously, my concern is that users of <=0.8.1 will be confused when they upgrade, which isn't very many people, but 0.8.1 is in Ubuntu 8.04 LTS, so may be used on desktops for another 3 years. If we can SRU the change from bug #234274 into Hardy then I am 100% behind switching. If not, I am only mostly in favour.

[Stephan Rügamer (sruegamer)]

Chris,

thinking about Ubuntu, I think we can argue this change into an SRU topic.
It has a good reasoning etc.

Just file the bug report with the debdiff attached and we will test it in -proposed..ah you know the way ;)

[Stephan Rügamer (sruegamer)]

Unsubscribing universe sponsors from the duplicate bug...we'll do the SRU way for hardy.
and for intrepid we'll wait for 0.9 ;)

\sh

[TheGZeus (gzeusmants)]

Gonna patch Emacs, XEmacs, Ion, Ratpoison, StumpWM, and GNU Screen, too?

Vertical split: Split into two parts, oriented vertically.

As to why there are no people defending it, why would they even be LOOKING for a bug they don't think exists???

In the end, I don't care. Why pull down and fill my RAM with gnomelibs for a terminal emulator? Why make up for a terrible Window Manager (one that makes you do everything manually, down to undocumented config) by duplicating the efforts of the people who wrote Screen?
Adding tabs to Screen makes alot more sense. If you need alot of terminals open, you probably know how to use the keyboard, and could learn Screen's shortcuts.

Have fun with the fork.

[MarianoAbsatz (el-baby)]

I didn't intend to start a flame... I just asked... maybe 'cause I use vi (not that it is any better than emacs... I just know how to use vi for simple tasks and never used emacs)... for me the first response by Chris (vim and emacs do it opposite ways, we chose one) was just enough... I'm not even using Terminator... I just was trying it and I noted something *I* thought was awkward, but YMMV.

Regards... and keep flaming :-)

[Chris Jones (cmsj)]

TheGZeus: those other projects are not mine to consider, so I have no intention of patching them, nor is that relevant here. I have discussed this bug with all of the Terminator developers and several users and the general concensus seems to be that the current behaviour is confusing. There is no definitive meaning for "split vertically" - it can either mean splitting along a vertical axis, or splitting into two vertically stacked children.
I didn't particularly choose one behaviour over another when I first wrote the text for the menu entries and given that there are existing projects which conflict in their meaning of this, I see no reason to religiously attach myself to either option - my aims are to make it as intuitive as possible and not to annoy existing users by changing things.

I think the thing to do at this point is to flip the meaning and then see how it goes - if we don;t get a backlash from users then there's no real issue here.
From what I can see of your comment on a blog about Terminator, you don't even use it (although neither does Mariano, but this issue has come up a number of times).

Please let's all try to keep our comments constructive :)

[David Scotson (david-scotson)]

Isn't the core 'problem' the ambiguity in the wording, a problem that doesn't go away regardless of which way you implement it?

With "split vertically" meaning either/both:

* split the window halfway along the vertical axis (with a horizontal line), or
* split the window with a vertical line (halfway along the horizontal axis)

and a list of projects that have done it either way then the only usable solution is to use a different, unambiguous phrase. If a good one can be found then bugs can be raised to get all, or at least some of, the projects to adopt it.

Some half-hearted brainstorming from me (a look at what the translations say would be interesting too):

* split from left to right (top to bottom)
* split down the middle (across the centre)
* split into top and bottom (left and right)
* landscape split (portrait split)
* split downwards (split across)

[Chris Jones (cmsj)]

Hi

David Scotson wrote:
> Isn't the core 'problem' the ambiguity in the wording, a problem that
> doesn't go away regardless of which way you implement it?

That is a very valid point, although I'm not sure there are any sane
alternatives (thanks for the suggestions, I just think they're either a
bit too wordy, or essentially as confusing as the current options).

What I do think would make it glaringly obvious would be if the menu
items had icons which clearly show two boxes oriented in the way we mean.

Cheers,
--
Chris Jones

[Cris G (krig-tiscali)]

About the meaning of "split horizontally" and "split vertically" I can say
that it should be inverted ( a rectangle is divided horizontally with a
horizontal line) just keep the current commands and invert the display text
it coul be ; and let things be simple, don't complicate with a lot of
commands; in fact, this is the goal ;) Cheers to everyone ;D

2008/5/27 Chris Jones <email address hidden>:

> Hi
>
> David Scotson wrote:
> > Isn't the core 'problem' the ambiguity in the wording, a problem that
> > doesn't go away regardless of which way you implement it?
>
> That is a very valid point, although I'm not sure there are any sane
> alternatives (thanks for the suggestions, I just think they're either a
> bit too wordy, or essentially as confusing as the current options).
>
> What I do think would make it glaringly obvious would be if the menu
> items had icons which clearly show two boxes oriented in the way we mean.
>
> Cheers,
> --
> Chris Jones
>
> --
> meaning of "horizontally" and "vertically"
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/201795
> You received this bug notification because you are a member of
> Terminator, which is subscribed to Terminator.
>

[Edoardo Batini (edoardo-batini)]

New Below
New Beside

[Chris Jones (cmsj)]

I have just committed a patch to trunk which reverses the spliting behaviour and I have added some (ugly) custom icons which should help make it less confusing (note that the icons will only appear properly if you do a package install, I think. I could use some guidance here, especially since I think it means our package might want to call gtk-update-image-cache)

[Chris Jones (cmsj)]

0.9 has now been released and should fix this.