[Rick Burnett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>]
|
| The problem is getting to that point. I just don't want to put the
| effort into emacs since vim does what I need better. Not saying that
| the whole 'vi' interface was any easier.
[...]
| Having remappable keys is part of the issue, the second part is a
| comprimise between usability and power. For new people to use
| something, its easier if it follows a standard of sorts, THEN, they
| can begin using EVERYTHING :)
was part of the point i wanted to make. having remappable keys, a high
degree of configurability doesn't solve much: most users typically don't
take the time to explore configuration parameters, focusing on getting the
job done. so, especially in the music field, I feel a good default, and an
interface with a character is a must. If it's configurable, it's even
better.
just wanted to pass the message that making an app fully configurable
shouldn't give an excuse to the programmer to think about the default
interface.
/vim and emacs are 2 bad examples. they either created or adhered to
ui standards but are foreign to each other and the pc world/
| Rick
|
| Saturday, July 28, 2001, you wrote:
|
| nk> [Rick Burnett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>]
|
|
| nk> | I like the idea of completely remapable hot-keys. My example
| because
| nk> [...]
|
| nk> | I also disagree that great effort should have to be put into using
| the
| nk> | UI, thats why I refuse to use emacs and framemaker period, they
| are
|
| nk> the funny part being that emacs feature those completly remapable
| hot-keys
|
| nk> --
| nk> n
| nk> ++k
|
|
|
--
n
++k
