Re: a key system to replace gnu emacs's 1000 default keybindings

["B. T. Raven" <btraven@nihilo.net>]

Die Fri May 25 2012 12:37:37 GMT-0500 (Central Daylight Time) Xah Lee
<xahlee@gmail.com> scripsit:

> 
> xah wrote:
>> my first voice blog.
>> 〈The Roadmap to Completely Replace Emacs's Key System〉
>> http://xahlee.org/emacs/emacs_keybinding_redesign.html
> 
> Xah wrote:
>  «Here's a new thing i've learned. Normally, it's a good advice to
> press combination keys using both hands. That is, suppose you want to
> press【Ctrl+x】. You should use right hand to hold right Ctrl and left
> hand to press x. But if you are a touch typer and leave your hand in
> standard position, so you press the x with 4th finger. That'll cause a
> major problem if done often.»
> 
> On May 25, 6:22 am, "B. T. Raven" <btra...@nihilo.net> wrote:
> «This was obvious from the start. You shouldn't have switched to CUA.»
> 
> note that, 【Ctrl+x】 is used by emacs more heavily than CUA's cut. So,
> it's even worse.
> 
> Raven wrote:
> «If you are that drastic you might as well go whole hog and redesign
> the Emacs ui for gaming keyboards with n-key rollover. That would make
> room for comfortably adding trillions of new bindings.»
> 
> yeah a hardware keyboard is certainly much better.
> 
> the best i can think of are:
> 
> μTron ($570)
> http://xahlee.org/kbd/uTRON_keyboard.html
> 
> “Truly Ergonomic” ($200)
> http://xahlee.org/kbd/Truly_Ergonomic_keyboard.html
> 
> Kinesis (≈$250)
> http://xahlee.org/emacs/keyboard_Kinesis.html
> 
> my analysis of their design, for my personal taste, starting with
> best, are: μTron, TE, Kinesis.
> 
> What's your fav?

I don't have any. I need someone from geekhack to make me one based
loosely on the symbolics space cadet. The Kinesis Advantage seems to
have the most impressive videoclips of speed typing but theres too much
unused real estate on it for my tastes. Does anyone here use it and, if
so, what have the keys been reprogrammed to?

> 
> Raven wrote:
> «… I think that ergonomic science is far enough advanced that the
> mouse can be done away with for most applications (even Autocad and
> Photoshop).»
> 
> i don't think this is true. e.g. just look at browser. There is
> absolutely no way keyboard can beat Mouse. Unless, you are considering
> other fancy devices other than traditional keyboard. (e.g. touch-pad,
> pen devices, touch screen, etc.)
> 
> 
> Raven wrote:
> «
> Besides dvorak layout and keytweak rearrangement in order to locate
> the most used modkeys closest to the (split) backspace-spacebar, the
> only changes I've made to default bindings are these:
> 
> ;; Single char cursor movement on Dvorak layout
> (global-set-key [(meta h)] 'backward-char-nomark)
> (global-set-key [(meta n)] 'forward-char-nomark)
> (global-set-key [(meta c)] 'previous-line-nomark)
> (global-set-key [(meta t)] 'next-line-nomark)
> (global-set-key [(meta H)] 'mark-paragraph) ;; upcased default
> bindings
> (global-set-key [(meta N)] 'next-buffer)
> (global-set-key [(meta C)] 'capitalize-word)
> (global-set-key [(meta T)] 'transpose-words)
> 
> shift-backspace and shift-space were at one time assigned to ( and )
> [much easier than shift-9 and shift-10) but shift-space now resolves
> to
> space, I know not why.
> »
> 
> Nice. Weren't you using ergoemacs keybinding before? didn't like other
> keys?

No, I never used ergoemacs. I read a few of the articles but disagreed
with most of them. I have a higher opinion of RMS's mnemonics than you
do.  However, the idea of getting real world statistics on emacs typing
behavior via a keylogger is a good one.

Ed

> 
>  Xah