> - Can you describe a bit how you imagine the changes to xkeyboard-config
> would look with this approach?
We would need changes wherever we want the new behaviour. I would prefer to
create new options for group switching, rather than modifying existing options.
Comments #117 and #118 show
Created attachment 131147
Proposed extension of the XKB protocol.
> Therefore, my proposal for you (or anyone else who is interested in changing
> the behavior) is to provide a patch against the spec.
That is a very good proposal. The patch formalises my proposal from comment
#112. An
(In reply to Zebediah Figura from comment #189)
> Can anyone shed light, for the outside user, as to the current status of
> this proposal? Thanks.
No news since. Apart from the formal proposal, there are some old patches for
its implementation:
Allowing arbitrary sequences to decide which action to take would
certainly be powerful, but quite some effort, also for specification
(think about multiple matching sequences).
In comment #117 I suggested an extension to the specification that is
restricted to the enhancement request at hand.
Created attachment 98826
Make Level 5 choosers more easily available
The patch makes existing options for Level 5 choosers more easily
available by adding them to the rules. This is useful in its own right,
irrespective of this bug. In context of this ongoing discussion, it
would allow to
