Re: [PATCH] adjusting korean key bindings

[Kenichi Handa <handa@m17n.org>]

In article <9d644d9b0906150521o23e54620v779832cc8df8e12@mail.gmail.com>, Jihyun Cho <jihyun.jo@gmail.com> writes:

> > Do you mean that we don't need the separate hanja input
> > method any more?

> What do you mean the "separate hanja input method"?
> If it means the method included in Emacs, we need it.

I mean the file leim/quail/hanja.el.

> I agree that F9 should be maintained as conversion key of Hanja.
> But the method `quail-hangul-switch-hanja' is not a general way in Korea.
> Korean people don't switch the input mode to use Hanja.
> We just input a Hangul Letter, then F9 will convert the Letter to Hanja.
> I think it's more simple than the method 'quail-hangul-switch-hanja'
> for Korean user.

It seems that we are miscommunicating.  I'm not discussing
whether "F9 should be maintained as conversion key of
Hanja."  As your patch doesn't change the f9 binding in
hangul-im-keymap, I don't have to argue about it.

What I want to know is how important the change of f9
binding in korean-key-bindings is.

> -    (global [f9]  quail-hangul-switch-hanja nil)
> +    (global [f9] hangul-to-hanja-conversion nil)

I asked you:

> The key-binding of F9 for quail-hangul-switch-hanja is what
> suggested long ago by a Korean person (I forgot who was
> that).  Has the usage of F9 in Korea been changed in these
> days?

and you replied as this:

> But some people are still using F9 and Shift-Space.

But now you say:

> But the method `quail-hangul-switch-hanja' is not a general way in Korea.
> Korean people don't switch the input mode to use Hanja.

I'm now confused.

If no one use the facility of quail-hangul-switch-hanja
nowadays, there's no reason to keep the current f9 binding
in korean-key-bindings.  But if some people still uses it,
we should not change it now.

So, which is the case?

---
Kenichi Handa
handa@m17n.org