From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jens Lechtenboerger Subject: Re: Key bindings for Org export back-ends? Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2019 16:18:55 +0100 Message-ID: <87womagvfk.fsf@informationelle-selbstbestimmung-im-internet.de> References: <87va1u3ctf.fsf@informationelle-selbstbestimmung-im-internet.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:48473) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gs7vt-0001jA-G6 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 08 Feb 2019 10:19:15 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gs7vs-00051H-7P for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 08 Feb 2019 10:19:13 -0500 Received: from mx2a.mailbox.org ([2001:67c:2050:104:0:2:25:2]:64002 helo=mx2.mailbox.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gs7vr-0004te-OJ for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 08 Feb 2019 10:19:12 -0500 Received: from smtp2.mailbox.org (smtp2.mailbox.org [80.241.60.241]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx2.mailbox.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 77BFEA1095 for ; Fri, 8 Feb 2019 16:19:05 +0100 (CET) Received: from smtp2.mailbox.org ([80.241.60.241]) by gerste.heinlein-support.de (gerste.heinlein-support.de [91.198.250.173]) (amavisd-new, port 10030) with ESMTP id CdyxjSWrPyH9 for ; Fri, 8 Feb 2019 16:18:56 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: (Kaushal Modi's message of "Fri, 8 Feb 2019 06:51:01 -0500") 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" To: emacs-org list On 2019-02-08, at 06:51, Kaushal Modi wrote: > On Fri, Feb 8, 2019, 3:28 AM Jens Lechtenboerger wrote: > >> - org-reveal [3]: R >> - org-re-reveal [4]: r (conflict with RSS) > > I see that org-re-reveal is based off org-reveal. So do you see a use case > where people would `require' both org-reveal and org-re-reveal? If not, > then using the same binding as that of org-reveal should be fine too. I don=E2=80=99t recommend that but org-re-reveal should allow for a parallel installation. Therefore, I would like to bind a different key. > I'm pretty sure there are many more Org backends out there. For example, I > have a little ox-minutes backend that uses the M binding (and overrides t= he > binding for ox-man, but that's fine for me as I don't use ox-man). > > We can start collecting a list of all Org backends on the Worg wiki. That= 's > a good idea. OK, let=E2=80=99s see whether additional input arrives. > But doing so in order to not override the binding of some > other backend might not be possible. Fair enough. At least some guidance will be given. >> Or C-r? So far, no back-end uses the >> control key. Any reasons not to do this? >> > > You could probably use C-, but one has to ensure that it doesn't > override the inbuilt bindings like C-s (C-c C-e C-s ..). Also, not sure if > that override would actually be effective. On my machine using "?\C-r" instead of "?r" as letter works, (resulting in integer number 18 in org-export-registered-backends). However, the Org Export Dispatcher shows "[^R]" as key, which is not ideal. Best wishes Jens