RG> I would suggest then to get rid with Super key (you are just
RG> paving a way for applications that start to use it and then
RG> sometime in the distant future it won't be practical to put it
RG> away because of those legacy applications that need it - exactly
RG> what happened with Alt and Meta to be the same key). And map Meta
RG> (just Meta) to Windows keys, and keep the possibility to choose
RG> between Alt and Alt&Meta for Alt key.
If you feel strongly enough about the issue, please take it up on
Xpert. The consensus (last time around) was that compatibility
between 102 and 104 key keyboards is a good idea.
RG> What is Super good for?
Well, there's those two keys on some keyboards, with that silly logo
on them. We need to put a keysym on them. We could either use one in
the private XFree86 space, register one with X.Org (count a year at
least), or reuse some standard keysym. We did the latter, and chose
Super.
Think about Super as an arbitrary label; the one that comes after Meta
but before Hyper.
RG> I feel that X keyboard is unnecessarily overcomplicated.
Paraphrasing the Xlib manual, keyboards used to be the greatest
variation between workstation hardware, and X11 is a portable system.
The keyboard model needed to be sufficiently flexible to deal with all
the weird workstation keyboards around.
(Actually, the core X11 keyboards is reasonably simple, except for its
treatment of modifiers. Xkb, OTOH, makes my head spin.)
Juliusz
--
Linux-UTF8: i18n of Linux on all levels
Archive: http://mail.nl.linux.org/linux-utf8/
