Re: Convert some files from outline-mode to org-mode

[Howard Melman]

Alan Mackenzie <address@hidden> writes:

> Hellow, Howard.
>
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 23:27:39 -0400, Howard Melman wrote:
>> (with-eval-after-load "outline"
>>   (define-key outline-minor-mode-map (kbd "C-<tab>") 'org-cycle)
>>   (define-key outline-minor-mode-map (kbd "S-<tab>") 'org-global-cycle)
>>   (define-key outline-minor-mode-map (kbd "M-<left>") 'outline-demote)
>>   (define-key outline-minor-mode-map (kbd "M-<right>") 'outline-promote)
>>   (define-key outline-minor-mode-map (kbd "M-<up>") 'outline-move-subtree-up)
>>   (define-key outline-minor-mode-map (kbd "M-<down>") 
>> 'outline-move-subtree-down)
>> )
>
> I disagree that these bindings are suitable for general use.
>
> For a start, most of them only exist in GUI frames, not TTYs.  M-<left>,
> etc. certainly don't (unless the keyboard has been specially enhanced,
> as mine has).
>
> Also, all these keys are "repeatable", i.e. you can let them run on
> auto-repeat.  Such keys are scarce and valuable, and shouldn't be
> "squandered" on commands that don't need them.  I suggest that the likes
> of outline-demote don't need such bindings.
>
> Also[2], the arrow keys, with modifiers, are highly likely to be in use
> by many users for things connected with movement, and defining them like
> this in outline-mode will inconvenience all of them.  For example, I've
> got M-<up> and M-<down> bound to commands to scroll the other window a
> single line.  I don't want to lose these, even in outline-mode.

Fair points, but I'll note these are bindings that org
currently uses (maybe not C-tab, I think org just uses tab).

The cycle commands are a bigger win then the others because
they save the user from having to remember several outline
bindings.

I think org has shown having such commands on the arrow keys
with some modifers is very popular and perhaps outline could
borrow from it.  And of course any user is free to override
them.

-- 

Howard