Re: lynx-dev 1+g vs fast-forward (was longer)

[Klaus Weide]

On Sat, 27 Feb 1999, Philip Webb wrote:
> 990227 Klaus Weide wrote: 
> > On Sat, 27 Feb 1999, Laura Eaves wrote:
> >> I looked at CHANGES and lynx.cfg and noticed 
> >> #KEYMAP:0x10F:FASTBACKW_LINK       # Move always to previous link or text 
> >> area
> >> #KEYMAP:^I:FASTFORW_LINK   # Move always to next link or text area
> >> I got <tab> to work but not 0x10F.
> >> Perhaps you could point me to the appropriate key sequence.
> > CHANGES says:  * new lynxkeycode BACKTAB_KEY with value 0x10F.
> -- snip --
> > BACKTAB_KEY will be recognized if the (n)curses keypad() input handling
> > returns KEY_BTAB, which happens if the terminal description has
> > the right kB or kcbt capability string and the terminal actually generates
> > that string (often "^[[Z", generated for shift+tab).
> > May also work with lynx-keymaps mechanism.  Not tested with slang,
> > maybe this has to be added to some more of the tables in LYStrings.c - KW
> > See also samples/lynx-keymaps.
> 
> Backtab doesn't work on my  kermit + curses + IRIX  communication path:
> Tab works as advertised.

MS-Kermit should allow you to define shift+tab to whatever byte sequence
you like.  I assume the same is true for other (non-Unix) kermits.

Whether that byte sequence is then recognized as KEY_BTAB depends on the
curses in conjunction with the terminal description.  If it isn't
recognized, you may be able to help it along via the .lynx-keymaps mechanism
(but that doesn't seem to be available for non-ncurses curses).

> >> My command is different: it skips to the next/previous *numbered* link.
> >> if form fields are not numbered,  1+g  will skip all form fields
> >> and link-less pages to get to the next numbered link.
> >> Comments?
> 
> i think you deserve a lot more thanks than you've been getting today.
> your new device is fully in the spirit of your earlier  123g  addition
> (which met with great scepticism from some other developers at the time)

Not that it's important, but you seem to have your history wrong.
Laura introduced form field numbering (and other improvements).
You can blame me for introducing RPN-like number commands (and
I was probably the most skeptical about it, whether it "would fly").

> & is much more widely useable than the new Tab device,
> esp as Backtab apparently won't work for some users (incl me).

(1) see above
(2) You can KEYMAP "FASTBACKW_LINK" to some other key - that's why
    those key commands have names after all.
    Actually, it seems that you (Philip) wanted the normal Up Arrow /
    Down Arrow keys to act like FAST*_LINK, as far as one aspect is
    concerned (skipping link-less pages).  So try to map your arrow
    keys to the new commands.  But this may act badly because of the
    other aspect (treating textarea lines together) - not tested by
    me.
    
> > I don't personally see a need for your addition (now),
> > but I have nothing against it.
>  
> why should you have anything against it?

Some comments seemed to be more critical - I'm just saying I'm not.

  Klaus