Re: [RFC] Proposal for rebindings in Org 8.3

Re: [RFC] Proposal for rebindings in Org 8.3

[Tim O'Callaghan]

>
> Rasmus <rasmus@gmx.us> writes:
>
>> For me the following keys need shift or Alt-Gr: ^, ", `, !, ?, and
>> ~.
>
> Oh, do you really need the Alt-Gr key for `?' and `!' ?
>
> Does that mean you don't use `C-c !' or that you rarely use it?
>
> Of course, this may have nothing to do with the keybinding itself,
> but I'm curious.
>

If i can throw in my 2-cents, I have been using Alt-O or(Meta-O if you
prefer) for a Ctrl-C, Ctrl-C substitute in org-mode for years. Now i
use a combination of an activation key (Alt-O or f4) and a kind of
fast-key mnemonic map. I need mnemonics because there is just too much
in org-mode, and i prefer to just type an extra key rather than have
to bend to hit a semi-random modifier + cryptic keymap entry.

so:
Alt+o,a => agenda,
Alt+o,0 => capture -> inbox
Alt+o,1 => agenda file 1
....
Alt+o, A,h => agenda - home tag
Alt+o,T,c => org table convert region
Alt+o,T,C,b => org table convert buffer.
....

Basically, two keys to most used personal functions. To save the
pinkies, alt and shift are the only modifiers. alt for the activator,
and shift to dig into a personalised sub-menu.  I tried binding to
FNkeys, but i could not memorise them. the "ah" = at home comes
naturally to me.

I for one will follow this idea with interest.

Tim.

Re: [RFC] Proposal for rebindings in Org 8.3

[Nick Dokos]

"Tim O'Callaghan" <timo@dspsrv.com> writes:

>>
>> Rasmus <rasmus@gmx.us> writes:
>>
>>> For me the following keys need shift or Alt-Gr: ^, ", `, !, ?, and
>>> ~.
>>
>> Oh, do you really need the Alt-Gr key for `?' and `!' ?
>>
>> Does that mean you don't use `C-c !' or that you rarely use it?
>>
>> Of course, this may have nothing to do with the keybinding itself,
>> but I'm curious.
>>
>
> If i can throw in my 2-cents, I have been using Alt-O or(Meta-O if you
> prefer) for a Ctrl-C, Ctrl-C substitute in org-mode for years. Now i
> use a combination of an activation key (Alt-O or f4) and a kind of
> fast-key mnemonic map. I need mnemonics because there is just too much
> in org-mode, and i prefer to just type an extra key rather than have
> to bend to hit a semi-random modifier + cryptic keymap entry.
>
> so:
> Alt+o,a => agenda,
> Alt+o,0 => capture -> inbox
> Alt+o,1 => agenda file 1
> ....
> Alt+o, A,h => agenda - home tag
> Alt+o,T,c => org table convert region
> Alt+o,T,C,b => org table convert buffer.
> ....
>
> Basically, two keys to most used personal functions. To save the
> pinkies, alt and shift are the only modifiers. alt for the activator,
> and shift to dig into a personalised sub-menu.  I tried binding to
> FNkeys, but i could not memorise them. the "ah" = at home comes
> naturally to me.
>
> I for one will follow this idea with interest.
>

I have a similar setup.

I use <f7> as a prefix key for many org operations (personal ones as
well as generic ones, mostly the less common ones but also a few of
the very common: e.g. I use <f7><f7> instead of `C-c a a').

One problem I had was that there are lots of things under that keymap
that I didn't use often enough to memorise, so I would end up looking in
my keydefs file to figure out where some operation was (and no, I can't
remember the names of the functions either...)

I recently found out that if after <f7> I press C-h, I get a description
of the keymap. That's probably well known in some circles, but I only
found out about it recently, reading the "Key Binding Conventions"
section in the elisp manual:

,----
|    * Don't bind `C-h' following any prefix character (including `C-c').
|      If you don't bind `C-h', it is automatically available as a help
|      character for listing the subcommands of the prefix character.
`----

That's *very* useful to me - if you don't know about it already, try it:
I think you'll find it very useful too!

-- 
Nick

Re: [RFC] Proposal for rebindings in Org 8.3

[Bastien]

Hi Nick,

Nick Dokos <ndokos@gmail.com> writes:

> ,----
> |    * Don't bind `C-h' following any prefix character (including `C-c').
> |      If you don't bind `C-h', it is automatically available as a help
> |      character for listing the subcommands of the prefix character.
> `----
>
> That's *very* useful to me - if you don't know about it already, try it:
> I think you'll find it very useful too!

(This one I knew.  My own recent discovery was C-h : to directly jump
to the definition of a symbol.  Pretty useful.)

-- 
 Bastien

Re: [RFC] Proposal for rebindings in Org 8.3

[Sebastien Vauban]

Hello Bastien,

Bastien wrote:
> (This one I knew.  My own recent discovery was C-h : to directly jump
> to the definition of a symbol.  Pretty useful.)

  ╭────
  │ C-h : is undefined
  ╰────

on my side. To what is it bound on your side?

Best regards,
  Seb

-- 
Sebastien Vauban

Re: [RFC] Proposal for rebindings in Org 8.3

[Bastien]

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

> Bastien wrote:
>> (This one I knew.  My own recent discovery was C-h : to directly jump
>> to the definition of a symbol.  Pretty useful.)
>
>   ╭────
>   │ C-h : is undefined
>   ╰────
>
> on my side. To what is it bound on your side?

find-function

C-h : runs the command find-function, which is an interactive
autoloaded compiled Lisp function in `find-func.el'.

It is bound to C-h :, <help> :.

(find-function FUNCTION)

Find the definition of the FUNCTION near point.

Finds the source file containing the definition of the function
near point (selected by `function-called-at-point') in a buffer and
places point before the definition.
Set mark before moving, if the buffer already existed.

-- 
 Bastien

Re: [RFC] Proposal for rebindings in Org 8.3

[Sebastien Vauban]

Bastien,

Bastien wrote:
> "Sebastien Vauban" writes:
>> Bastien wrote:
>>> (This one I knew.  My own recent discovery was C-h : to directly jump
>>> to the definition of a symbol.  Pretty useful.)
>>
>>   ╭────
>>   │ C-h : is undefined
>>   ╰────
>>
>> on my side. To what is it bound on your side?
>
> find-function
>
> C-h : runs the command find-function, which is an interactive
> autoloaded compiled Lisp function in `find-func.el'.
>
> It is bound to C-h :, <help> :.
>
> (find-function FUNCTION)
>
> Find the definition of the FUNCTION near point.
>
> Finds the source file containing the definition of the function
> near point (selected by `function-called-at-point') in a buffer and
> places point before the definition.
> Set mark before moving, if the buffer already existed.

Weird. I don't even see the binding in `find-func.el' (in Emacs trunk
from last week):

  ╭────
  │ ;;; find-func.el --- find the definition of the Emacs Lisp function near point
  │ 
  │ ;; Copyright (C) 1997, 1999, 2001-2014 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
  │ 
  │ ...
  │ 
  │ ;;;###autoload
  │ (defun find-function-setup-keys ()
  │   "Define some key bindings for the find-function family of functions."
  │   (define-key ctl-x-map "F" 'find-function)
  │   (define-key ctl-x-4-map "F" 'find-function-other-window)
  │   (define-key ctl-x-5-map "F" 'find-function-other-frame)
  │   (define-key ctl-x-map "K" 'find-function-on-key)
  │   (define-key ctl-x-map "V" 'find-variable)
  │   (define-key ctl-x-4-map "V" 'find-variable-other-window)
  │   (define-key ctl-x-5-map "V" 'find-variable-other-frame))
  │ 
  │ (provide 'find-func)
  ╰────

Best regards,
  Seb

-- 
Sebastien Vauban

Re: [RFC] Proposal for rebindings in Org 8.3

[Bastien]

Hi Sébastien,

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

> Weird. I don't even see the binding in `find-func.el' (in Emacs trunk
> from last week):

My bad -- this is a custom keybinding of mine, I added it long ago and
rediscovered it recently.  It definitely deserve a keybinding of its
own IMO.

-- 
 Bastien

[RFC] Proposal for rebindings in Org 8.3

[Bastien]

The purpose is to be polite with minor modes and to not use
C-c [:punct:] keybindings, as recommended in the Elisp manual.

This is related to the issues reported here:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-orgmode/2014-01/msg00866.html
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.orgmode/82010

Here is a table to summarise the proposal:

| Key   | Command                           | Proposal         | Status |
|-------+-----------------------------------+------------------+--------|
| C-c # | Checkboxes                        | C-c x            | Free   |
| C-c ~ | Cooperation                       | C-c C-~          | Free   |
| C-c , | Priorities                        | C-c C-,          | Free   |
| C-c ? | Editing and debugging formulas    | C-c C-?          | Free   |
| C-c ! | Creating timestamps               | C-c C-!          | Free   |
| C-c . | Creating timestamps               | C-c C-.          | Free   |
| C-c ` | Built-in table editor             | C-c C-`          | Free   |
|-------+-----------------------------------+------------------+--------|
| C-c ' | Editing and debugging formulas    | C-c " or C-c C-' | Free   |
| C-c ^ | Structure editing, plain lists... | C-c C-^          | Taken  |
| C-c @ | Structure editing                 | C-c <            | Taken  |

The order is from the less problematic ones to the more problematic ones.

A few comments on the last three:

- " is not a punctuation character, I find C-c " instead of C-c ' good.

- C-c C-^ is taken by org-up-element.  I'm in favor of using C-c C-u
  (currently bound to `outline-up-heading') for `org-up-element'.
  Nicolas suggested C-M-u but I find it convenient to have it when
  editing Elisp code within Org buffers.

- C-c < is bound to `org-date-from-calendar', which inserts the
  current date (or the date from the calendar buffer) at point as
  an active timestamp.

  C-c > is bound to `org-goto-calendar' and goes to the calendar,
  going to the date at point if any.  This is just a slightly more
  contextual M-x calendar RET.

  So the whole suggestion here is:
  
  - in Org-mode, remap calendar to org-goto-calendar and unbind it
    from C-c >

  - use C-c > for `org-date-from-calendar'

  - use C-c < for selecting the whole subtree, which is consistent
    with the use of `<' as a speedy command for doing the same.

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.

Thanks,

-- 
 Bastien

Re: [RFC] Proposal for rebindings in Org 8.3

[Sebastien Vauban]

Bastien wrote:
> The purpose is to be polite with minor modes and to not use
> C-c [:punct:] keybindings, as recommended in the Elisp manual.
>
> This is related to the issues reported here:
> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-orgmode/2014-01/msg00866.html
> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.orgmode/82010
>
> Here is a table to summarise the proposal:
>
> | Key   | Command                           | Proposal         | Status |
> |-------+-----------------------------------+------------------+--------|
> | C-c # | Checkboxes                        | C-c x            | Free   |
> | C-c ~ | Cooperation                       | C-c C-~          | Free   |
> | C-c , | Priorities                        | C-c C-,          | Free   |
> | C-c ? | Editing and debugging formulas    | C-c C-?          | Free   |
> | C-c ! | Creating timestamps               | C-c C-!          | Free   |
> | C-c . | Creating timestamps               | C-c C-.          | Free   |
> | C-c ` | Built-in table editor             | C-c C-`          | Free   |
> |-------+-----------------------------------+------------------+--------|
> | C-c ' | Editing and debugging formulas    | C-c " or C-c C-' | Free   |
> | C-c ^ | Structure editing, plain lists... | C-c C-^          | Taken  |
> | C-c @ | Structure editing                 | C-c <            | Taken  |
>
> The order is from the less problematic ones to the more problematic ones.
>
> A few comments on the last three:
>
> - " is not a punctuation character, I find C-c " instead of C-c ' good.
>
> - C-c C-^ is taken by org-up-element.  I'm in favor of using C-c C-u
>   (currently bound to `outline-up-heading') for `org-up-element'.
>   Nicolas suggested C-M-u but I find it convenient to have it when
>   editing Elisp code within Org buffers.
>
> - C-c < is bound to `org-date-from-calendar', which inserts the
>   current date (or the date from the calendar buffer) at point as
>   an active timestamp.
>
>   C-c > is bound to `org-goto-calendar' and goes to the calendar,
>   going to the date at point if any.  This is just a slightly more
>   contextual M-x calendar RET.
>
>   So the whole suggestion here is:
>   
>   - in Org-mode, remap calendar to org-goto-calendar and unbind it
>     from C-c >
>
>   - use C-c > for `org-date-from-calendar'
>
>   - 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.

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

> 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,

- 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'?

Best regards,
  Seb

-- 
Sebastien Vauban

Re: [RFC] Proposal for rebindings in Org 8.3

[Bastien]

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

Re: [RFC] Proposal for rebindings in Org 8.3

[Michael Brand]

Hi Bastien

On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 11:32 AM, Bastien <bzg@gnu.org> wrote:
> | C-c # | Checkboxes                        | C-c x            | Free   |

I did not know "C-c #" (org-update-statistics-cookies) because for me
it is easier to remember and therefore I always used this: Go to
cookie and do "C-c C-c". And "C-c x" does not comply with the Elisp
manual:

    Don't define C-c letter as a key in Lisp programs. Sequences
    consisting of C-c and a letter (either upper or lower case) are
    reserved for users; they are the only sequences reserved for
    users, so do not block them.

    Changing all the Emacs major modes to respect this convention was
    a lot of work; abandoning this convention would make that work go
    to waste, and inconvenience users. Please comply with it.

With these two reasons my suggestion is to just drop the binding for
(org-update-statistics-cookies).

Michael

Re: [RFC] Proposal for rebindings in Org 8.3

[Bastien]

Hi Michael,

Michael Brand <michael.ch.brand@gmail.com> writes:

> With these two reasons my suggestion is to just drop the binding for
> (org-update-statistics-cookies).

Agreed.  If noone objects, I'll remove C-c #.

-- 
 Bastien

Re: [RFC] Proposal for rebindings in Org 8.3

[Nick Dokos]

Bastien <bzg@gnu.org> writes:

> The purpose is to be polite with minor modes and to not use
> C-c [:punct:] keybindings, as recommended in the Elisp manual.
>
> This is related to the issues reported here:
> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-orgmode/2014-01/msg00866.html
> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.orgmode/82010
>
> Here is a table to summarise the proposal:
>
> | Key   | Command                           | Proposal         | Status |
> |-------+-----------------------------------+------------------+--------|
> | C-c # | Checkboxes                        | C-c x            | Free   |
> | C-c ~ | Cooperation                       | C-c C-~          | Free   |
> | C-c , | Priorities                        | C-c C-,          | Free   |
> | C-c ? | Editing and debugging formulas    | C-c C-?          | Free   |
> | C-c ! | Creating timestamps               | C-c C-!          | Free   |
> | C-c . | Creating timestamps               | C-c C-.          | Free   |
> | C-c ` | Built-in table editor             | C-c C-`          | Free   |
> |-------+-----------------------------------+------------------+--------|
> | C-c ' | Editing and debugging formulas    | C-c " or C-c C-' | Free   |
> | C-c ^ | Structure editing, plain lists... | C-c C-^          | Taken  |
> | C-c @ | Structure editing                 | C-c <            | Taken  |
>
> The order is from the less problematic ones to the more problematic ones.
>
> A few comments on the last three:
>
> - " is not a punctuation character, I find C-c " instead of C-c ' good.
>

On a QWERTY keyboard or Dvorak keyboard, " requires Shifting, so you
have to switch horses midstream (first Control, then SHift). Not sure
about anybody else, but those are the most problematic key sequences for
me. I would much prefer C-c C-': you just keep the Control key pressed
for the duration.

> - C-c C-^ is taken by org-up-element.  I'm in favor of using C-c C-u
>   (currently bound to `outline-up-heading') for `org-up-element'.
>   Nicolas suggested C-M-u but I find it convenient to have it when
>   editing Elisp code within Org buffers.
>
> - C-c < is bound to `org-date-from-calendar', which inserts the
>   current date (or the date from the calendar buffer) at point as
>   an active timestamp.
>
>   C-c > is bound to `org-goto-calendar' and goes to the calendar,
>   going to the date at point if any.  This is just a slightly more
>   contextual M-x calendar RET.
>
>   So the whole suggestion here is:
>   
>   - in Org-mode, remap calendar to org-goto-calendar and unbind it
>     from C-c >
>
>   - use C-c > for `org-date-from-calendar'
>
>   - use C-c < for selecting the whole subtree, which is consistent
>     with the use of `<' as a speedy command for doing the same.
>
> 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.
>
> Thanks,

--
Nick

Re: [RFC] Proposal for rebindings in Org 8.3

[Rasmus]

Nick Dokos <ndokos@gmail.com> writes:

> Bastien <bzg@gnu.org> writes:
>
>> The purpose is to be polite with minor modes and to not use
>> C-c [:punct:] keybindings, as recommended in the Elisp manual.
>>
>> This is related to the issues reported here:
>> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-orgmode/2014-01/msg00866.html
>> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.orgmode/82010
>>
>> Here is a table to summarise the proposal:
>>
>> | Key   | Command                           | Proposal         | Status |
>> |-------+-----------------------------------+------------------+--------|
>> | C-c # | Checkboxes                        | C-c x            | Free   |
>> | C-c ~ | Cooperation                       | C-c C-~          | Free   |
>> | C-c , | Priorities                        | C-c C-,          | Free   |
>> | C-c ? | Editing and debugging formulas    | C-c C-?          | Free   |
>> | C-c ! | Creating timestamps               | C-c C-!          | Free   |
>> | C-c . | Creating timestamps               | C-c C-.          | Free   |
>> | C-c ` | Built-in table editor             | C-c C-`          | Free   |
>> |-------+-----------------------------------+------------------+--------|
>> | C-c ' | Editing and debugging formulas    | C-c " or C-c C-' | Free   |
>> | C-c ^ | Structure editing, plain lists... | C-c C-^          | Taken  |
>> | C-c @ | Structure editing                 | C-c <            | Taken  |
>>
>> The order is from the less problematic ones to the more problematic ones.
>>
>> A few comments on the last three:
>>
>> - " is not a punctuation character, I find C-c " instead of C-c ' good.
>>
>
> On a QWERTY keyboard or Dvorak keyboard, " requires Shifting, so you
> have to switch horses midstream (first Control, then SHift). Not sure
> about anybody else, but those are the most problematic key sequences for
> me. I would much prefer C-c C-': you just keep the Control key pressed
> for the duration.

I agree that it's better if we can avoid letters needing a 'secondary'
key.

Unfortunately, I think this wish is hard to meet when considering
several layouts.

For me the following keys need shift or Alt-Gr: ^, ", `, !, ?, and ~.

Rasmus

-- 
If you can mix business and politics wonderful things can happen!

Re: [RFC] Proposal for rebindings in Org 8.3

[Bastien]

Rasmus <rasmus@gmx.us> writes:

> For me the following keys need shift or Alt-Gr: ^, ", `, !, ?, and
> ~.

Oh, do you really need the Alt-Gr key for `?' and `!' ?

Does that mean you don't use `C-c !' or that you rarely use it?

Of course, this may have nothing to do with the keybinding itself,
but I'm curious.

-- 
 Bastien

Re: [RFC] Proposal for rebindings in Org 8.3

[Samuel Wales]

i'd like to point out that some of these bindings are problematic on
qwerty in a way that is not obvious to many users.

many people use shifting keys on both sides of the keyboard.

they do not issue the control of control g using left hand.  that is a
bad idea.  instead, they hold down the right control with right hand
then do g with left hand.

any sequence where one step is on one side and another step is on the
other side is fine unless they are both shifted.  at that point they
become so cumbersome they are likely to be rebound by the user.

fortunately, most of emacs does not use the cumbersome type of binding.

hih.

samuel

-- 
The Kafka Pandemic: http://thekafkapandemic.blogspot.com

The disease DOES progress.  MANY people have died from it.  ANYBODY can get it.

Denmark: free Karina Hansen NOW.

Re: [RFC] Proposal for rebindings in Org 8.3

[Bastien]

Hi Samuel,

Samuel Wales <samologist@gmail.com> writes:

> any sequence where one step is on one side and another step is on the
> other side is fine unless they are both shifted.

I understand.  I don't think any of the proposed rebindings requires
this -- except C-c " -- but C-c C-' is better anyway.

-- 
 Bastien

Re: [RFC] Proposal for rebindings in Org 8.3

[Samuel Wales]

On 2/8/14, Bastien <bzg@gnu.org> wrote:
> I understand.  I don't think any of the proposed rebindings requires
> this -- except C-c " -- but C-c C-' is better anyway.

hi bastien,

c-c c-' is just as bad.  control is a modifier key.  try it!

samuel

-- 
The Kafka Pandemic: http://thekafkapandemic.blogspot.com

The disease DOES progress.  MANY people have died from it.  ANYBODY can get it.

Denmark: free Karina Hansen NOW.

Re: [RFC] Proposal for rebindings in Org 8.3

[Samuel Wales]

well, almost as bad :).  you have to press shift also, but that's a
minor difference :).

Re: [RFC] Proposal for rebindings in Org 8.3

[Bastien]

Samuel Wales <samologist@gmail.com> writes:

> c-c c-' is just as bad.  control is a modifier key.  try it!

I tried it and for me it is better than C-c '

Anyway, let's try to find the best replacement.

-- 
 Bastien

Re: [RFC] Proposal for rebindings in Org 8.3

[Samuel Wales]

hi bastien,

i meant that c-c c-' and c-c c-" are both cumbersome for those users
who press c-c by holding down the control key with the right hand and
then pressing c with the left hand.  c-c ' is not cumbersome for those
users.

samuel

-- 
The Kafka Pandemic: http://thekafkapandemic.blogspot.com

The disease DOES progress.  MANY people have died from it.  ANYBODY can get it.

Denmark: free Karina Hansen NOW.

Re: [RFC] Proposal for rebindings in Org 8.3

[Bastien]

Hi Samuel,

Samuel Wales <samologist@gmail.com> writes:

> i meant that c-c c-' and c-c c-" are both cumbersome for those users
> who press c-c by holding down the control key with the right hand and
> then pressing c with the left hand.  c-c ' is not cumbersome for those
> users.

I understand better now, thanks.

What I don't understand is why keeping the right control key between
C-c and C-' is harder than releasing the control key between C-c and
' (or " as also proposed.)  My experience (which seems the same than
Nick's) is that holding the control key down is easier/faster.

(I wonder if any serious ergonomical study has been done for Emacs
beybindings depending on keyboards.)

-- 
 Bastien

Re: [RFC] Proposal for rebindings in Org 8.3

[Achim Gratz]

Bastien writes:
> What I don't understand is why keeping the right control key between
> C-c and C-' is harder than releasing the control key between C-c and
> ' (or " as also proposed.)  My experience (which seems the same than
> Nick's) is that holding the control key down is easier/faster.

That depends on the keyboard layout, but if pressing "'" requires the
use of the right hand, then you'd need to switch to the laft for
pressing Control (unless you were chording it with the right hand, which
is probably a bad thing for anyone inflicted with RSI).

> (I wonder if any serious ergonomical study has been done for Emacs
> beybindings depending on keyboards.)

Quite certainly not.  There are oodles of keybindings that really don't
work sensibly with anything but a UNIX keyboard and the whole concept is
clearly inspired by the Lisp Machine "Space Cadet" keyboard.  I wish I'd
still have my Sun Type4 keyboard… Similarly, you really don't get why
anybody thought "\" was a good path separator until you take a look at
the original PC/XT keyboard (it was also a non-modifier key on most
terminal keyboards at the time, but "/" was more prominent there).


Regards,
Achim.
-- 
+<[Q+ Matrix-12 WAVE#46+305 Neuron microQkb Andromeda XTk Blofeld]>+

Factory and User Sound Singles for Waldorf rackAttack:
http://Synth.Stromeko.net/Downloads.html#WaldorfSounds

Re: [RFC] Proposal for rebindings in Org 8.3

[Bastien]

Hi Nick,

Nick Dokos <ndokos@gmail.com> writes:

> On a QWERTY keyboard or Dvorak keyboard, " requires Shifting, so you
> have to switch horses midstream (first Control, then SHift). Not sure
> about anybody else, but those are the most problematic key sequences for
> me. I would much prefer C-c C-': you just keep the Control key pressed
> for the duration.

That's actually the same on an AZERTY keyboard, I prefer to keep the
control key pressed.

Also, the change to C-c C-' is easier to remember.

-- 
 Bastien

Re: [RFC] Proposal for rebindings in Org 8.3

[Thomas S. Dye]

Bastien <bzg@gnu.org> writes:

> A few comments on the last three:
>
> - " is not a punctuation character, I find C-c " instead of C-c ' good.

Is it true that " is not a punctuation character? 

In any event, C-c " is likely to pose the same problem as C-c '.  For
icicle users, C-c " will be shadowed by the keybinding for
icicle-search-text-property.

At least that's my current working hypothesis.  Feel free to correct me
if I'm wrong.

All the best,
Tom
-- 
Thomas S. Dye
http://www.tsdye.com

Re: [RFC] Proposal for rebindings in Org 8.3

[Bastien]

Hi Thomas,

tsd@tsdye.com (Thomas S. Dye) writes:

> Bastien <bzg@gnu.org> writes:
>
>> A few comments on the last three:
>>
>> - " is not a punctuation character, I find C-c " instead of C-c ' good.
>
> Is it true that " is not a punctuation character?

It is a string in both fundamental-mode and org-mode, that's what I'm
checking.  But it is a punctuation character in other modes and maybe
in our "minds".

I agree the intuition is misleading here, because ' is a punctuation
character.

> In any event, C-c " is likely to pose the same problem as C-c '.  For
> icicle users, C-c " will be shadowed by the keybinding for
> icicle-search-text-property.

... which, strictly speaking, is not an org-mode problem if " is not
a punctuation character.

> At least that's my current working hypothesis.  Feel free to correct me
> if I'm wrong.

It encourages me to find a completely different solution.

The one I have in mind now is to use C-c : (and to move the current
C-c : binding to C-c C-:).  The reasoning is that we have

- fixed-width
- example blocks
- source code blocks

which often achieve a similar goal: to present some code snippets.
Source blocks are more powerful than example blocks which are more
powerful than fixed-width regions.  But you can currently edit them
all with C-c '.

So C-c : would call org-edit-src-code and C-c C-: would convert the
region to fixed-width region.

What you (and others) think?

Eric, what's your take on this, as the "father" of C-c ' ?

-- 
 Bastien

Re: [RFC] Proposal for rebindings in Org 8.3

[Achim Gratz]

Bastien writes:
> So C-c : would call org-edit-src-code and C-c C-: would convert the
> region to fixed-width region.

You cannot enter C-: in some terminals because it would require
simultaneous processing of shift and control (these terminals ignore
shift while control is pressed).


Regards,
Achim.
-- 
+<[Q+ Matrix-12 WAVE#46+305 Neuron microQkb Andromeda XTk Blofeld]>+

SD adaptation for Waldorf microQ V2.22R2:
http://Synth.Stromeko.net/Downloads.html#WaldorfSDada

Re: [RFC] Proposal for rebindings in Org 8.3

[Greg Troxel]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1495 bytes --]


Bastien <bzg@gnu.org> writes:

> | Key   | Command                           | Proposal         | Status |
> |-------+-----------------------------------+------------------+--------|
> | C-c # | Checkboxes                        | C-c x            | Free   |
> | C-c ~ | Cooperation                       | C-c C-~          | Free   |
> | C-c , | Priorities                        | C-c C-,          | Free   |
> | C-c ? | Editing and debugging formulas    | C-c C-?          | Free   |
> | C-c ! | Creating timestamps               | C-c C-!          | Free   |

I tried C-c C-! in my environment, and it fails, no noticing the C-!
(which involves shift) keypress (with ^H k; I get it that this is
proposed).  I have C-1 bound in my window manager to switch desktops,
since that binding doesn't take away the ability to generate any ASCII
character.

I'm running "emacs -nw" under tmux on one machine (netbsd), connected
via ssh from a mac using Terminal.

While one can argue that various emulations are broken, org should be
fully usable with a 7-bit terminal connection, and non-kludgy with an
8-bit connection.  In general, I find that emacs works fine with that,
although one has to prefix with ESC instead of the meta key.

I've always been bothered by keybindings like C-S-left, which while
useful, cause there to be no available keystroke sequence to perform the
function.

I find this surprising; I'd expect within emacs/org culture there to be
more people using terminal-mode emacs.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 180 bytes --]