On Thursday 27 May 2004 21:17, Jim Wilson wrote:
> Lee Elliott said:
> > I hope there's no flame war over this - it's too important.
> >
> > Part of the problem with coming up with a good keyboard mapping scheme is
> > that a comprehensive survey of the requirements needs to be done before
> > anything can be planned e.g. are slats simply toggleable (erk!) or do
> > they need to be stepped up/down?  (I guess this particular example could
> > be accommodated via Nasal, as used for the flap indents - I've already
> > done this for the B-52F, which only has two flap positions, so
> > essentially they're being toggled)
> >
> > Perhaps a wiki could help to gather the information, then many people
> > could enter the requirements they know about and it would avoid having to
> > make a single person responsible for finding everything out and possibly
> > missing something, which would lead to a flawed solution.
> >
> > Then there could also be an issue with some keyboard combinations being
> > difficult to use when the context is taken into consideration, i.e. is
> > having to use Shift/Control combos to control things a good idea at
> > critical points in the flight, such as take-offs and landings?
> Would a survey would help that much?  There's always something new on the
> horizon anyway isn't there?  We're already seeing some good input.  After
> some discussion here, if someone just took on the job and made the changes
> it could be presented for further discussion and modification.
> Just to check... we aren't talking about a complete remapping are we?  The
> problems mentioned so far seemed solvable without going that far.
> Best,
> Jim

I think a survey would be a good idea, for the same reason I suggested 
something like a wiki for doing it - without making sure that every 
possibility is in some way catered for some things could be excluded or 

I don't hold any strong opinions about it really - just things that have 
occurred to me while developing & testing FG a/c, but a complete re-mapping 
might, or might not be a good idea - I just don't think that all the 
requirements have been identified yet and until then any progress or 
decisions are likely to miss something.


Flightgear-devel mailing list

Reply via email to