From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nicolas Goaziou Subject: Re: [ANN] List improvement v.2 Date: Fri, 03 Sep 2010 22:26:31 +0200 Message-ID: <8762ymbmko.wl%n.goaziou@gmail.com> References: <87ocdzw7gq.wl%n.goaziou@gmail.com> <43BA920D-4EA2-4C51-B941-33A60D097EB3@gmail.com> <87wrr3b4r3.wl%ucecesf@ucl.ac.uk> <87aanyc2v7.wl%n.goaziou@gmail.com> <8762ympx1h.wl%ucecesf@ucl.ac.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.6 - "Maruoka") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Return-path: Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=57235 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ord87-0003Et-VC for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 03 Sep 2010 16:45:01 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Orcvb-0005ZH-Je for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 03 Sep 2010 16:32:04 -0400 Received: from mail-wy0-f169.google.com ([74.125.82.169]:59404) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Orcvb-0005Z3-FY for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 03 Sep 2010 16:32:03 -0400 Received: by wyb36 with SMTP id 36so2473278wyb.0 for ; Fri, 03 Sep 2010 13:32:02 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <8762ympx1h.wl%ucecesf@ucl.ac.uk> List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: e.fraga@ucl.ac.uk Cc: Eric S Fraga , Org Mode List , Carsten Dominik > I must be dreaming... I am *sure* that, until yesterday or today, I > have always used C-c C-x C-b to insert a checkbox if none were > present; at least, that's what my fingers tell me and they have a > better memory than my head... I have always used C-c C-c to actually > mark or unmark the checkbox. Have the default bindings changed? I remember now. When I rewrote org-toggle-checkbox, I followed closely its docstring. Thus, the default bindings changed because they weren't on par with documentation. > In any case, apologies for the noise but maybe I can suggest a > change to the default? C-c C-c already does an excellent job of > checking/unchecking a checkbox so it would be nice if C-c C-x C-b > would do as I thought it did: insert a checkbox if not present. Is > this a reasonable or desirable behaviour? C-c C-x C-b is more specific than C-c C-c. When used on an headline, it checks/unchecks all the items in the subtree. When used with a region active, it should checks/unchecks all items inside it. About the last point, I just noticed it isn't working as expected at the moment, but I have a patch for it. Regards, -- Nicolas