From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Stefan Monnier" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [usability] mouse-1 for performing actions? Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 16:05:19 -0400 Sender: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: <200205212005.g4LK5Km03173@rum.cs.yale.edu> References: <200205211557.g4LFvW127045@aztec.santafe.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1022011567 8768 127.0.0.1 (21 May 2002 20:06:07 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 20:06:07 +0000 (UTC) Cc: jas@extundo.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 17AFtX-0002HJ-00 for ; Tue, 21 May 2002 22:06:07 +0200 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 17AG87-0006f9-00 for ; Tue, 21 May 2002 22:21:11 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 17AFte-0007KT-00; Tue, 21 May 2002 16:06:14 -0400 Original-Received: from rum.cs.yale.edu ([128.36.229.169]) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 17AFsm-0007Hc-00; Tue, 21 May 2002 16:05:20 -0400 Original-Received: (from monnier@localhost) by rum.cs.yale.edu (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g4LK5Km03173; Tue, 21 May 2002 16:05:20 -0400 X-Mailer: exmh version 2.4 06/23/2000 with nmh-1.0.4 Original-To: Richard Stallman Errors-To: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.9 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:4253 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:4253 > Why does emacs use mouse-2 for activating hyperlinks, buttons etc? > > Because these buffers are usually read-only, which means that the > normal definition of mouse-2 (yank) is not applicable. > > The normal definition of mouse-1 is perfectly meaningful in these > buffers. It seems like a bad idea to replace it with something > incompatible and make the normal definition of mouse-1 unavailable. > > Do you have a precise proposal that you think is ok? I understand the above reason, but I must agrre that newbies find it surprising that nothing happens when the click with mouse-1 (most of them rarely use mouse-2 since most applications only ever use mouse-1 anyway or mouse-3 occasionally for a contextual menu). We should try and come up with some way to have our cake and eat it too. For this we need to figure out what do people use "mouse-1 click on mouse-sensitive text" for. In my case, it's mostly for cut&paste, which means that drag-mouse-1 should definitely prevent the hyperlink activation. Maybe I also sometimes us mouse-1 to place the cursor just before or just after the hyperlink (the just-after case is OK because it doesn't risk activating the hyperlink, but the just-before might require special handling). Stefan