[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [CVS] f7, f8 bound..
From: |
Miles Bader |
Subject: |
Re: [CVS] f7, f8 bound.. |
Date: |
Fri, 30 Aug 2002 19:55:28 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.3.28i |
On Fri, Aug 30, 2002 at 04:48:41PM +0200, Kim F. Storm wrote:
> IMO, we better use the function keys for things which makes using
> emacs easier.
...
> As an example, M$-Word (which I would image quite a few users are
> using -- like it or not) has the following bindings
...
> Seems completely arbitraty to me...
Right -- I think the same can be said for almost _any_ binding, except
absurdly standardized ones like F1 (though even that's really useful for PC
users).
Personally I think it's silly to even think about having standardized
bindings for function keys; we should just leave them all for user-use
(except F1 and F10 I suppose, because they're apparently _very_ standard, and
for backward-compatibilty reasons).
Certainly, for operations you perform _very_ often, it can be convenient to
have them on a function key -- but exactly which operations those are is very
subjective. For any operation that you only perform _somewhat_ often, on the
other hand, function keys are a positively _bad_ user interface: they're
hard to touch-type and more importantly, they're very hard to remember.
A _much_ better idea, I think, would be to make it very simple for even
novice users to easily _bind_ the function keys to their liking; I'm not
saying it's all that hard now, but I mean, make it really, really, easy.
For instance, a mode that shows a graphical representation of the function
keys and their current bindings, and allows the user to trivially change them.
Perhaps by moving the cursor to a function key picture, and hitting SPC/RET
which would make it prompt for a another key-binding, and then copy that to
the function key; while in this special mode, it might even locally rebind
all the function keys so that you could just hit e.g. `F5 C-x C-f' to bind F5
to find-file.
What do you think about this?
-Miles
--
P.S. All information contained in the above letter is false,
for reasons of military security.
- Re: [CVS] f7, f8 bound.., (continued)
- Re: [CVS] f7, f8 bound.., Francesco Potorti`, 2002/08/28
- Re: [CVS] f7, f8 bound.., Kai Großjohann, 2002/08/28
- Re: [CVS] f7, f8 bound.., Francesco Potorti`, 2002/08/28
- Re: [CVS] f7, f8 bound.., Richard Stallman, 2002/08/28
- Re: [CVS] f7, f8 bound.., Kai Großjohann, 2002/08/29
- Re: [CVS] f7, f8 bound.., Richard Stallman, 2002/08/30
- Re: [CVS] f7, f8 bound.., Kim F. Storm, 2002/08/30
- Re: [CVS] f7, f8 bound..,
Miles Bader <=
- Re: [CVS] f7, f8 bound.., Alex Schroeder, 2002/08/31
- Re: [CVS] f7, f8 bound.., Kim F. Storm, 2002/08/29
- Re: [CVS] f7, f8 bound.., Francesco Potorti`, 2002/08/29
- Re: [CVS] f7, f8 bound.., Edward O'Connor, 2002/08/28
- Re: [CVS] f7, f8 bound.., Miles Bader, 2002/08/28
- Re: [CVS] f7, f8 bound.., Richard Stallman, 2002/08/28
- Re: [CVS] f7, f8 bound.., Miles Bader, 2002/08/28
- Re: [CVS] f7, f8 bound.., Richard Stallman, 2002/08/30
- Re: [CVS] f7, f8 bound.., Stefan Monnier, 2002/08/30
- Re: [CVS] f7, f8 bound.., Richard Stallman, 2002/08/30