Re: [Texmacs-dev] Keybindings(2)

[Joris van der Hoeven]

> The logical/physical markup confusion was a silly mistake of mine. I see
> now the rationale, but I'd prefer the logical markup access keys to be
> more accesible than the physical ones. I think all logical markup should
> be fit into A-* keys, like the sectioning commands. Anyway, F5/F6 are
> really far from my fingers for everyday use.

But that is already the case: you also have A-s, A-m, etc.
for strong, emphasize, etc.

My only regret with the new conventions is that the Greek letters
are harder to obtain with F5. How do you feel about that?
On the other hand, we do have fast keystrokes for bold,
caligraphic and fraktur using F6, F7 and F8.
These are not yet available via A-* keys, but that *is* a plan.

> Regarding the math issue: I would like to have keybindings for
> \equation, \equation*, \eqnarray* and the forthcoming \eqnarray*. 

You may use "\ [ return" for \equation*.
You are right that we should have bindings for the others.
Which bindings would you suggest?

> Perhaps this could be done by establishing one cycle key. This cycle key
> would cycle amongst table types and figure types as well. It's a "kind
> cycle key". Others could be thought of, for example the "style cycle
> key" for cycling amongst numbering schemes for enumerations, bullet
> characters for bulleted lists, citation styles and more (perhaps
> numbered/unnumbered equations would fit here). And there should be a
> "hierarchical cycle key" to cycle between depth levels in section
> titles, depth levels in enumerations, etc. etc. The point is to keep
> cycles short, at most with 4/5 possible states, else back/forth cycle
> keys would be necessary (or returning to the original state would be
> slow). This is why I suggest to search for orthogonal cycles
> (kind/style/depth, for example). 

I agree that we need cycling, but I did not yet have time
to implement this :^(

> Anyway, these are my dreams and I understand this poses a big problem
> for the typesetter, because heavy reprocessing would be needed to show
> the results while cycling. 

No, that is OK, since the enclosed structures (an equation or the text
of a theorem) are usually small. Possible exceptions are big itemize
or enumerate lists, but one or two pages are retypeset reasonably fast
too anyway (about 0.25 sec on a 600MHz machine).

> It would be nice to have TeXmacs typeset it's own keybindigns with some macros
> and thus form a "reference card". I don't know how to do this.

That is also a project; it presupposes some other stuff related
to buffer handling.

> I'm still discovering the new keybinding set, so give me some time...

Yep.

> have fun,

That aplies to *you*