Re: M-TAB already used by KDE

[kai.grossjohann@uni-duisburg.de (Kai Großjohann)]

Fredrik Staxeng <fstx+u@update.uu.se> writes:

> kai.grossjohann@uni-duisburg.de (Kai Großjohann) writes:
>
>>> If the default of x-meta-keysym is '(meta alt), then I am happy.
>>
>>Now that you bring it up, it would be a good idea to allow lists
>>instead of just symbols.  But that isn't implemented yet.
>
> What problem was this intended to solve then?

KDE really really wants to see Alt_L and Alt_R keysyms for meta-like
functionality.  So using (setq x-meta-keysym 'alt), I can use them for
meta-like functionality in Emacs, too.

> Key names are just labels. What matters is the mapping from key
> position to behaviour. The Emacs command set is designed with 
> the expectation that there is a shift-like modifier key that
> is given the name Meta. In reality, very few keyboards provide
> a key labeled Meta, but they provide a convenient substitute.
> It's labeled Alt on PC keyboards, and it is labeled <> on Sun
> keyboards. 

Yes.

> Sun users know that their Alt key is not the same as the PC Alt key,
> but PC users generally do not know the details of Sun keyboards.
> They are used to that Alt is synonymous with Meta. Introducing a
> different concept with the same name into Emacs is confusing.
>
> On the other hand, Super and Hyper are unambigously distinct from
> Meta/Alt. That is, instead of putting mappings on Alt, which 
> assumes a Sun keyboard, put them on Super.

And what do people do who had Super bindings before?

You are suggestion to remove modifiers.  This is not a good idea.
People with foot pedals will hate you!

> Your solution strikes me as a bit overengineered. I don't see the 
> need for full generality here, especially since there are two
> (or three) other general layers (xkb, xmodmap and Emacs keymaps).
> The solution above is simpler to understand and use for the 
> common practical cases I can imagine.
>
> If you really want full generality, the most powerful solution
> would be a x-key-translate-hook.

Yes.  Thanks for the suggestion.  I'll have to think about that
"overengineered" part.  Hmmm...

-- 
~/.signature is: umop ap!sdn    (Frank Nobis)