RE: customizing key definitions with Customize

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

>     It would typically be libraries, not users, that would create
>     customizable keymaps (i.e. options). But please don't get 
>     hung up on where or when the option is created.
> 
> I asked you to show me what it would look like to use this in Lisp
> mode, and that is what you showed me.  I took you at your word and
> commented on what you showed me, and now you say I am "hung up".

I didn't say you were hung up. I asked you to please not get hung up on that
topic.

Probably it would have been better if I had used different words. What I meant
by my request was that we postpone that part of the discussion until after we've
figured out what the "means of customizing" should be - "how it works in Lisp
and what the user experiences in Customize." That's all I meant - not that you
are hung up in any way.

I was no doubt not clear enough on how I see this - I hope it's clear now what I
meant: Libraries (Lisp code) would propose to users what bindings are available
to be customized (but that wouldn't stop them from customizing more if they
wanted). 

I sent the option-creation function in the form of a command that provides
completion so that people could easily try the code out with different keymaps.
A priori, I have nothing for or against letting users also use such a command,
but I envisioned the creation of the keymap options being done by Lisp code,
typically.

> I have said what I think about how to make this a good feature.
> Since I will not be the one to implement it, I think I have done
> all that I can usefully do.

Likewise, I guess. Will anybody be implementing such a feature in Emacs? I think
it would be a useful addition. I haven't claimed and I won't claim that the
implementation I sent is how things should ultimately be done. I offered it
mainly to as a prototype to show what key-definition customization might look
like for a user and to explore some of the possible issues.

I separated user option and keymap variable for the reasons I gave: (1) leaving
open the possibility of not necessarily encouraging customization of all keys in
a keymap and (2) the implementation issue that a keymap structure is not
immediately one that Customize can use (without changes). Alternatively,
Customize could perhaps be made to understand keymaps directly.

I hope that some agreement can be reached on what kind of UI and implementation
would be most useful, and I hope someone with good Customize knowledge is
interested in working on that implementation. This could be a useful feature.