[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: mule Chinese input inconveniences

From: Miles Bader
Subject: Re: mule Chinese input inconveniences
Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 13:08:01 GMT

richter@poincare.math.northwestern.edu (Bill Richter) writes:
> Miles, so you want RET to do what C-SPC already does?  Some reason
> C-SPC isn't good enough?  You just want a uniform interface?  Maybe
> C-SPC only works in GB?

I want a uniform interface.  I also think that binding RET is an
intuitive choice, and would make using using the input methods easier
for beginners.

In the Japanese input method, C-SPC is bound to a function that discards
everything but the first character, and exits the selection mode
(actually, you could argue that this is what the Chinese binding does
too, as you're never inputting more than one character at a time!).

I think the bindings of C-f &c. are also confusing, and not uniform
enough (for instance in the Japanese input method it's C-n and C-p that
move forwards and backwards among the possible choices, whereas C-f does
something completely different, and have to use the `l' key to select
the next row of translations [like C-n does in the Chinese input
method]; personally I think the Chinese bindings of the direction keys
make more sense).


p.s. When I say `Chinese input method,' I mean `chinese-py'.
Love is a snowmobile racing across the tundra.  Suddenly it flips over,
pinning you underneath.  At night the ice weasels come.  --Nietzsche

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]