[Flightgear-devel] keyboard.xml update
While messing around with an aeromatic generated Lancaster model I discovered that there are a few inconsistencies in keyboard.xml. It allows you to reduce the magneto setting on 4 engines, but will only increase it on 2, which tends to result in a somewhat circular path from the end of the runway :-) --- /flightgear/FlightGear-Base-CVS/keyboard.xml2003-09-25 15:29:34.0 +0100 +++ keyboard.xml2003-09-30 18:52:27.0 +0100 @@ -961,6 +961,24 @@ property/controls/engines/engine[1]/magnetos/property step type=int1/step /binding + binding + descthird engine/desc + condition +property/sim/input/selected/engine[2]/property + /condition + commandproperty-adjust/command + property/controls/engines/engine[2]/magnetos/property + step type=int1/step + /binding + binding + descfourth engine/desc + condition +property/sim/input/selected/engine[3]/property + /condition + commandproperty-adjust/command + property/controls/engines/engine[3]/magnetos/property + step type=int1/step + /binding /key key n=126 -- Jon Stockill [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] keyboard.xml update
Oops didn't even notice that when looking the other day. This has been added to the CVS now. Best, Jim Jon Stockill [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: While messing around with an aeromatic generated Lancaster model I discovered that there are a few inconsistencies in keyboard.xml. It allows you to reduce the magneto setting on 4 engines, but will only increase it on 2, which tends to result in a somewhat circular path from the end of the runway :-) --- /flightgear/FlightGear-Base-CVS/keyboard.xml 2003-09-25 15:29:34.0 +0100 +++ keyboard.xml 2003-09-30 18:52:27.0 +0100 @@ -961,6 +961,24 @@ property/controls/engines/engine[1]/magnetos/property step type=int1/step /binding + binding + descthird engine/desc + condition +property/sim/input/selected/engine[2]/property + /condition + commandproperty-adjust/command + property/controls/engines/engine[2]/magnetos/property + step type=int1/step + /binding + binding + descfourth engine/desc + condition +property/sim/input/selected/engine[3]/property + /condition + commandproperty-adjust/command + property/controls/engines/engine[3]/magnetos/property + step type=int1/step + /binding /key key n=126 -- Jon Stockill [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel -- Jim Wilson - IT Manager Kelco Industries PO Box 160 58 Main Street Milbridge, ME 04658 207-546-7989 - FAX 207-546-2791 http://www.kelcomaine.com ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] keyboard.xml: wing leveler, gear
I'd like to propose some changes to keyboard.xml: 1. There's no key for the wing leveler. Ctrl-w is still free and consistent with the other autopilot settings. 2. I have never understood why the gear is a property-toggle. It is quite common to land with gear down, but it's hard to tell if the gear is up or down at a particular moment if no panel is activated. This is a big problem for many of the modeled aircrafts. And then, the gear indicator might be broken. In a real aircraft the pilot can feel the state of the gear from the lever. He shouldn't even have to look there. (Well, he can only feel the =real= state of the gear when he touches down, but that's a different matter. ;-) I'm using g for gear up and G for gear down. I never have to fear that I might actually retract the landing gear on approach. Shift-G is always secure in this situation. Hitting it twice doesn't hurt. 3. Maybe the DC3's tail wheel lock should be mapped to l and L in this way, too? Comments? (Yes I know, everybody (except me) is now used to a toggling gear, but does security in air traffic not count at all? :-) m. key n=23 nameCtrl-W/name descToggle autopilot wing leveler./desc binding commandproperty-toggle/command property/autopilot/locks/wing-leveler/property /binding /key key n=103 nameg/name descGear up./desc binding commandproperty-assign/command property/controls/gear-down/property value type=double0.0/value /binding /key key n=71 nameG/name descGear down./desc binding commandproperty-assign/command property/controls/gear-down/property value type=double1.0/value /binding /key ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] keyboard.xml: wing leveler, gear
Melchior FRANZ [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: I'd like to propose some changes to keyboard.xml: 1. There's no key for the wing leveler. Ctrl-w is still free and consistent with the other autopilot settings. When I redo the autopilot code (might start next week) it might be appropriate to revist the bindings anyway. We don't have an engage function either, and that is pretty basic to how an autopilot is supposed to work. It'll be configurable per aircraft according to what the desired capabilities are (as well as other parameters such as the ones that exist now). I'm using g for gear up and G for gear down. I never have to fear that I might actually retract the landing gear on approach. Shift-G is always secure in this situation. Hitting it twice doesn't hurt. Just the other day I was thinking the same thing after making a beautiful approach and landing (not a common occurance with this pilot) in the DC3 only to be stopped dead in my tracks because the gear was up when I thought it was down. On occaision when not paying attention the g will get hit twice. 3. Maybe the DC3's tail wheel lock should be mapped to l and L in this way, too? Maybe for keyboard users we need to have a set of keys that are reserved for aircraft specific applications and not necessarily matched up with the first letter of the desired function. Best, Jim ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] keyboard.xml
I was having a fiddle with keyboard.xml to support a UK keyboard, and discovered that the characters £ and ¬ (which are shift-3 and shift-key to left of 1) break the XML parser. Is this intentional? Also, in the grand re-organisation of the XML files that appears to be planned, do we need to consider a better way to handle non-US keyboard layouts? UK is not too different, only the punctuation is rearranged, but other european layouts move the letters around as well. Perhaps a generic keyboard.xml, with keyboard-uk.xml or whatever included to redefine the relevant keys? Richard ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
re: [Flightgear-devel] keyboard.xml
Richard Bytheway writes: I was having a fiddle with keyboard.xml to support a UK keyboard, and discovered that the characters £ and ¬ (which are shift-3 and shift-key to left of 1) break the XML parser. Is this intentional? By default 8-bit XML files use Unicode UTF-8 encoding. That's the same as ASCII up to 127, but then it uses 2-, 3-, and 4-byte escape sequences to model over 60,000 more characters. For your problem, there are a couple of solutions. The easiest one might be just to declare the encoding you're using, such as ISO 8859-1 (Latin 1): ?xml version=1.0 encoding=ISO-8859-1? This is *not* guaranteed to be portable to all XML parsers -- some might not support 8859-1 (though most do). It will also screw anyone who wants to bind, say, Han characters from a Chinese keyboard. Another alternative is to use character entities, similar to \0nnn sequences in C strings. The Sterling character is (I think) 163 in both Latin 1 and Unicode, so you can use Here is a #163; sign. and when the XML document is displayed or processed, you should see Here is a £ sign. I don't remember what the value for Euro is. The final, and most elegant solution, is to configure your text or XML editor to load and save in UTF-8 format. I think you can do that with Emacs+Mule, though I haven't tried it. Note that most control characters cannot be included in XML documents at all, even with character references, no matter what the encoding. It's OK to include tab, space, newline, and carriage return, but ^L (for example) will always cause a parsing error. Also, in the grand re-organisation of the XML files that appears to be planned, do we need to consider a better way to handle non-US keyboard layouts? UK is not too different, only the punctuation is rearranged, but other european layouts move the letters around as well. What we need to do is have FlightGear read a local config file in a user directory after reading the defaults from $FG_ROOT. All the best, David -- David Megginson [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] keyboard.xml
Richard Bytheway wrote: I was having a fiddle with keyboard.xml to support a UK keyboard, and discovered that the characters £ and ¬ (which are shift-3 and shift-key to left of 1) break the XML parser. Is this intentional? Also, in the grand re-organisation of the XML files that appears to be planned, do we need to consider a better way to handle non-US keyboard layouts? UK is not too different, only the punctuation is rearranged, but other european layouts move the letters around as well. It's not the location of the keys, but their encoding values. In this case, the pounds sterling symbol (which I cannot easily type) has an ISO-8859-1 value of 163, while the # symbol, which US keyboards have in that position (and which, confusingly, is also often called a pound sign) is represented by 35. The core point is that XML is encoded, by default, in unicode's UTF-8. UTF-8 has the nice property that ASCII values less than 128 encode as themselves. But higher values, including the ISO-8859-1 symbols you want to type, do not. The XML parser will break if you hand it an ISO-8859-1 document. Now, the XML standard allows for specifying the document encoding in the header. I don't know if ours does or not, but it's probably worth investigating. Andy -- Andrew J. RossNextBus Information Systems Senior Software Engineer Emeryville, CA [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.nextbus.com Men go crazy in conflagrations. They only get better one by one. - Sting (misquoted) ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
