From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nick Dokos Subject: Re: org-meta-return Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2013 19:11:38 -0500 Message-ID: <5951.1361405498@alphaville> References: <5387.1361401155@alphaville> Reply-To: nicholas.dokos@hp.com Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:56651) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U8JlI-0007x0-Bs for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 20 Feb 2013 19:11:51 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U8JlF-0004GJ-BA for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 20 Feb 2013 19:11:44 -0500 Received: from g4t0017.houston.hp.com ([15.201.24.20]:18631) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U8JlF-0004Fm-35 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 20 Feb 2013 19:11:41 -0500 In-Reply-To: Message from 42 147 of "Wed, 20 Feb 2013 18:28:00 EST." List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: 42 147 Cc: Org Mode [Warning: off-topic] 42 147 wrote: > My hands might be smaller than average, or, at least, smaller than yours. > To reach I must shift my entire arm to the right and > downward. To reach no such movement is necessary. Maybe a slight > turn of the wrist to the right. > I doubt my hands are bigger than yours: I have to do exactly what you describe (at least on the bigger keyboards). It's just not as big a deal for me as it is for you. > > Of course, these things are *highly* personal preferences, and you might > > have a lower tolerance for pain than I have, but I have to ask: where > > exactly is your key relative to ? > > Warning, digression: > > I'm ultra cautious about finger / wrist strain. Even if I feel slight > discomfort from a keybinding, I will change it to be more ergonomic and > strain-free. Practically every basic Emacs movement command has been > rebound for optimum comfort as a QWERTY typist. > > Many of the default Emacs keybindings are notational, not positional. For > example, C-p and C-n. I've made them all positional. C-p / C-] are now > paired together for previous-line / next-line. C-q / C-e for > beginning-of-line / end-of-line. From a positional standpoint, C-p / C-n > makes absolutely no sense. > Agreed - they are only mnemonically significant. And I think you are right in taking precautions. As I said, I'm a sufficiently bad typist so that all these sins have not bitten me (at least not yet - and they are rapidly running out of time). Have you tried a Dvorak keyboard? My son uses a QWERTY keyboard, mapped in software to Dvorak - he learnt to touch type on one by switching all the keycaps, although he didn't need the crutch after a while, so his second keyboard has all the keycaps in the standard places - they just produce different characters than what the keycaps say. This had two advantages for him: the Dvorak placement which reduces strain (supposedly at least), and the fact that I couldn't say to him "Move over and let me drive for a while". I tried a couple of times and I can still hear his laughter... I suspect that unless one is an experienced Dvorak typist, it is a better security device than many passwords :-) I'm not sure a Dvorak keyboard would help with emacs chords though. Another possibility is one of the funky Kinesis keyboards: a colleague would wax ecstatic about his, but he was not an emacs user. And they are too expensive to buy one just to try it out. I'd be interested if somebody has tried either a Dvorak keyboard or a Kinesis one with emacs - but this is way off-topic by now, so maybe not. Nick