RE: Describing local-map/keymap in overlays/text properties

[Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com>]

> > Pushing the normal output of "C-h b" further down the buffer doesn't
> > make sense, either.  How about a new "C-h" command, or perhaps an
> > argument to "C-h b" that would trigger this new display?
> 
> If you're pushing `C-h b', you want to know what commands are available
> for you.  That's the point of the command.  The commands that are
> available in the local text properties are the ones that matter to you
> most, because you moved the cursor there.

No, that's one use case of `C-h b', and yes, it ignores text-property
bindings.

If you make `C-h b' take into account `point' then it no longer shows
you binding information about the current context (buffer) in general.

If `a' is bound in the current buffer/mode to `self-insert-command',
but there is a text-property binding of `a' to `ignore', then `C-h b'
output will show only the latter.  You lose the general info.

Or if you choose to show both, and the fact that the text-property
bindings shadow other bindings, then why privilege text-property
bindings this way?  We don't do that in `C-h b' for other bindings
that override bindings.

`C-h b' does not currently tell you, for example, that `a' is bound
in the `global-map' to `self-insert-command' AND that it is bound in
the current local keymap to `foobar' AND that it is bound in the
currently active minor mode `toto' to `toto-go-fish'... AND give you
information about the various binding shadowings.  It simply gives
you the current effective binding of `a'.