Re: Modifier Keys and the Archaic Meta Key

[Christopher Dimech]

> It seems to me that only makes sense on your keyboard, not mine.
> I have no problem with allowing users the ability to define other modifier 
> keys,
> but that would likely require the underlying code to support more morifier 
> bits
> that is does currently.

C* I was just discussing the customary modifier keys historically associated 
with
Emacs.  There are five: {C,M,S,H,s}.

> > Consequently the Alternate Control Modifier Key would simply
> > be associated with Alt, but to the key as Priority 2, which
> > can be Alt, Esc, etc.
>
> That seems like adding a lot of words with no real value-added.  If there are
> no keyboards in existance today > with a key labeled Meta, then the meaning is
> clear that it is the other modifier key without needing to resort to excessive
> verbosity.

C* That is not always precise because Emacs also recognises the Hyper and Super
Keys as well, which I use - although using hardware remapping for the location 
of
those keys.

> On my keyboard the keys are labeled (center to left) space, command, 
> alt/option,
> control, function.  Depending on Emacs version the Meta key seems to change 
> between
> Command and Option, I tend to adapt.  However, I am getting to like using 
> option

C* The new idea is to dissociate what is actually written on a particular 
keyboard.
We name the Modifier Keys as "Control, Alternate Control, Hyper, Shift, Super".
Then associate the names to what one actual has printed on the keyboard.  One 
can
use xev and xmodmap for that.  Example, one can say Alternate Control is "Alt"
on Peter's Keyboard whilst it is "Meta" or "Esc" on Shirley's Keyboard.  Whilst
the Alternate Control Key is "Option" on Frances' Keyboard.

> As far as I know the Function key is an OS-level key that modifies the 
> keystrokes
> sent to the application, bnut I could be wrong.

C*  There are two key codes associated with each key, one communicates with 
Applications,
whilst the other communicates with the Hardware.  They are different codes.


---------------------
Christopher Dimech
Chief Administrator - Naiad Informatics - GNU Project (Geocomputation)
- Geophysical Simulation
- Geological Subsurface Mapping
- Disaster Preparedness and Mitigation
- Natural Resource Exploration and Production
- Free Software Advocacy


> Sent: Sunday, October 25, 2020 at 9:12 PM
> From: "Francis Belliveau" <f.belliveau@comcast.net>
> To: No recipient address
> Cc: "Help Gnu Emacs" <help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org>
> Subject: Re: Modifier Keys and the Archaic Meta Key
>
>
>
> > On Oct 25, 2020, at 09:46, Christopher Dimech <dimech@gmx.com> wrote:
> >
> > Rather than referring to the five principal Modifier Key,
> > immediately by Key Mnemonics, it is more useful to have
> > a name for them categorised by priority.
> >
> > The Five Principal Modifier Keys can be called Control,
> > Alternate, Hyper, Shift, Super, then associate any mnemonic
> > one wants (Ctrl, Ctl) (Meta, Alt, Esc).
>
> It seems to me that only makes sense on your keyboard, not mine.
> I have no problem with allowing users the ability to define other modifier 
> keys, but
> that would likely require the underlying code to support more morifier bits 
> that is
> does currently.

C* One can split Ctrl_L from Ctrl_R (and Alt_L from Alt_R, ... etc).

> > It is recognised that the Control Modifier Key and the
> > Meta Modifier Key are exclusively and most widely used
> > Modifier Keys for Emacs Built-In Keybindings.  Consequently
> > I group them together, one call it Control, whilst the other
> > as Alternate Control.  It makes the use of key much more precise.
> >
> > Consequently the Alternate Control Modifier Key would simply
> > be associated with Alt, but to the key as Priority 2, which
> > can be Alt, Esc, etc.
>
> That seems like adding a lot of words with no real value-added.  If there are 
> no keyboards in existance today with a key labeled Meta, then the meaning is 
> clear that it is the other modifier key without needing to resort to 
> excessive verbosity.
>
> > I agree of the utility of possibly more Modifier Keys.  However, sticking
> > with officially Five Major Modifier Key for now is adequate.  I customarily
> > use Mechanical Keyboards with Colemak Key Variation, and have to rebind 
> > certain
> > Key Sequences that are built-in into Emacs.  I also remap the order of keys
> > from (C, s, M) to (s, M, C).  In this way priority increases from right to
> > left.  The C Key is mapped to the key immediately to the left of the space 
> > bar
> > as in the original setup of the Lisp Keyboards.  However I do not simply 
> > switch
> > the Meta and Control Key as many have done, but organise the Keymaps by 
> > priority
> > going outward.
> >
>
> On my keyboard the keys are labeled (center to left) space, command, 
> alt/option, control, function.
> Depending on Emacs version the Meta key seems to change between Command and 
> Option, I tend to adapt.  However, I am getting to like using option since it 
> is distinct from the OS use of command. Option seems to be an 
> application-specific modifier whereas Command has OS utility.  As far as I 
> know the Function key is an OS-level key that modifies the keystrokes sent to 
> the application, bnut I could be wrong.
>
> Fran
>
>
>
>