[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [External] : New key binding syntax

From: Richard Stallman
Subject: Re: [External] : New key binding syntax
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2021 23:05:27 -0500

[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider    ]]]
[[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies,     ]]]
[[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]

  > > I also wonder if there could be confusion between M-RET
  > > and M-<return> if the former can be written M-ret and
  > > the latter can me written M-return.

  > There's no confusion.  (And the former cannot be written
  > M-ret.)

As long as we keep the rule that the special control character names
must be upper case, and  function key names must be lower-case,
I think it will avoid confusion.

I think someone proposed to eliminate that rule.

  > PS. Of course, if we cared deeply about readability we would write instead:

  >         Alt + Return

If we stick to that rule, we would want to write `alt' and `return'.
Allowing spaces inside a single key name would definitely be confusing
as long as space separates keys in a key sequence.  But we could allow
`alt-return' as an alternative to `a-return'.

I see no benefit in allowing `+' as a synonym for `-'.

Dr Richard Stallman (https://stallman.org)
Chief GNUisance of the GNU Project (https://gnu.org)
Founder, Free Software Foundation (https://fsf.org)
Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]