Re: emacs-w3m question

[Xavier Maillard <xma@gnu.org>]

Hi Xha,

[what a long post ! :)]

   On Nov 3, 3:25 am, Xavier Maillard <x...@gnu.org> wrote:
   >    in perhaps early 1990s, some keyboards do not have the arrow keys, or
   >    that some applications (in particular, terminal applications) do not
   >    necessarily support physical arrow keys by default.
   >
   >    Today, i think more than 99.999% keyboards and applications support
   >    the physical arrows keys by default. The availablity of arrow keys i
   >    think is pretty much standard by mid 1990s, and their support in
   >    applications including term emulators is probably standard by 2000.
   >
   > At work, I still have oldies that still do not support these
   > keys. What's more, directional keys are one of the dumbest
   > addition one could have thought off (in my opinion). The same
   > apply for numerical keypad: what are they useful for exactly ? Is
   > it that hard to press shift+& (for the azerty keyboard) to get a
   > 1 ? Or press C-b to move point left ? I do not think so.

   The numerical keypad, and the physical cursor moving keys, are
   technical superior to their counterparts in the main section of the
   keyboard for many applications.

   For example, if your job is data entry, the numerical keypad is much
   more efficient to operate than the numbers on top row of the main
   keys.

I agree with that but all the job positions consisting in typing
numerical data only, typing ZIP code is something that comes to
mind (at least here in France), is done on a very simplified
keypad with only numeric keys, <DEL> and <ENTER>. They would not
need anything but these keys.

   In the same way, arrow keys, and the dedicated function keys for page
   up/down, home/end keys, are superior to key combos in the main section
   because they involve single key press with a clear label, and their
   physical layout makes them more efficient to operate.

On a laptop, PG-UP/PG-DOWN or even Home/End are often combos to
type either. For example on my laptop, you have to press the Fn
key + directional keys if you want them. In that case, C-a/C-e
are a lot quicker to type than Fn+left or Fn+right. My laptop
keyboard is not an exception.

   You can test these by, for example, try to type a quarter page of
   phone numbers in a yellow book. (this is assuming that you do touch
   type on the numerical keypads. (e.g.  you are not a noob who refuse to
   learn )) Similarly, you can try to play pacman by using the arrow
   keys, as compared to using Alt+n Alt+p Alt+f Alt+b, and see which one
   is more efficient.

The cool thing with Alt or Ctrl keys is this: they are doubled
(and I can even add other Alt/Ctrl keys by changing my dumpkey
setup). For example, here I have two Alt (r and l), three Ctrl
keys (one by default plus Caps Lock changed to Ctrl and Alt+Menu
which is also Ctrl for me). So if it comes that Alt-n or other is
hard to type with one Alt key, I could try to do it with the
other possibilities making such movement globally better than if
I had to look at my keyboard keys to search the directional keys.

Like Chris told, I do not like to leave the "home keys" when
typing. My fingers know where to go with few movements and by
trying to decrease the risk to get a RSI. That's what matter the
most for me. I do not type with my 10 fingers but only 6 and I
feel very comfortable like that.

[I will have to finish reading the rest of your post later :)]

Regards,

	Xavier
-- 
http://www.gnu.org
http://www.april.org
http://www.lolica.org