Re: [RFC] Proposal for rebindings in Org 8.3

[Bastien <bzg@gnu.org>]

Thanks for your feedback.

"Sebastien Vauban" <sva-news-D0wtAvR13HarG/iDocfnWg@public.gmane.org>
writes:

>>   - use C-c < for selecting the whole subtree, which is consistent
>>     with the use of `<' as a speedy command for doing the same.
>
> You put the finger on one important note to me: that speed commands are
> "the same" as their longer counterpart.  It should be good if all of
> them could be obtainable by adding "C-c C-" in front of the speed
> command.

I think it goes in the opposite direction: if a command is bound to
C-c KEY or C-c C-KEY then KEY should be used as a speed command.

> With that focus in mind, I find `C-c x' not a good one (for checkboxes);
> though, in that case, speed commands don't come into play.

The mnemonic here is: `x' reminds me of [x] -- let's see if something
better can be done.

> But I find it
> too different from the `C-c C-' construct used for the others?

I wanted to keep it close to C-c #, and use only C-c KEY.

>> Let me know how you feel about such move in general and each rebinding
>> in particular.  We are not forced to solve them all at once.
>
> Globally, it's fine!
>
> Last remark about `C-c <' which I find not good:
>
> - `<' in used for filtering categories in the agenda,

Categories are (most often) attached to a subtree.

When you hit the `<' speed command on this subtree then display
the agenda, you don't need to filter by category with `<' since
the narrowing already filters (by category) for you.

That's actually one of the reason for which I propose this key.

> - semantically, what `C-c @' does is a `C-x h' limited to a subtree;
>   maybe there could be something inspiring similar to `C-x h'?  Maybe
>   `C-u C-x h'?

The way to get the same behavior than `C-c @' is `C-c C-^ M-h'.
M-h is very very handy, and probably not known enough!

-- 
 Bastien