Re: Enhancements to "minor-mode-map-alist" functionality.

[Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>]

    The actual interpretation of C-x is done via three of cua's 7 keymaps.

Using separate keymaps for C-x seems reasonable.

I wonder, though, why simply putting all three in minor-mode-map-alist
won't do the job.  As I recall, if any active keymap defines a binding
with a non-prefix definition, that should override all prefix
definitions regardless of the precedence order of the maps.  Is that
not true now?  If not, maybe we could make it true again.  So there is
no need to worry about the relative order of your maps and all other
maps.

If you need to condition some of these maps on some symbol's being
false, then we could make the minimal extension so far proposed, which
is to allow minor-mode-map-alist (or another new alist) to have
conditions which are more complex than just a symbol.  But you do see
if you can easily get away without that.

    To facilitate this, three more keymaps are used which selectively does
    command remapping of `kill-ring-save' to handle either region, rectangle,
    or the global mark.

It would be cleaner to define a single new command for that purpose.

    The final keymap is used to allow users to take advantage of cua's
    uniform command set for rectangles (and the global mark), but still
    continue to use C-w, M-w and C-y instead of C-x, C-c, and C-v (which
    are the normal cua bindings).

Which characters does this map redefine?