Hi Howard; Your response got me thinking. No need to reply unless you want but I am using this as an opportunity to get my thoughts down on virtual paper.
On Sat, 2007-02-24 at 12:43 -0600, Howard Coles Jr. wrote: > On Saturday 24 February 2007 11:18:08 am William Case wrote: > > On Sat, 2007-02-24 at 11:46 +0100, M Henri Day wrote: > > > 2007/2/23, William Case <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > Thanks for responding Henri; > > > > > > > > On Fri, 2007-02-23 at 15:26 +0100, M Henri Day wrote: > > > > > 2007/2/23, William Case <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > > > Hi; > > > > [snip] > > > > > Bill, it should indeed be easy ! And - thanks to JJJ - it certainly has > > > become much easier ! Here are the glyphs you were wished to produce from > > > your keyboard, produced directly from mine : ✔ ♠ ♣ ♥ ♦. The procedure is > > > as follows : Ctrl + Shift + u, then release, type the hexcode, and then > > > space-bar, e g, Ctrl + Shift + u, 2660, space-bar = ♠. It works > > > splendidly on my Ubuntu machine ; try it and see if it doesn't work on > > > your Fedora set-up ! All credit here is due not me, but JJJ, who > > > patiently explained the process so that even I could understand.... > > > > > > Henri > > > > That's my point. I have been using "Ctrl + Shift + u, then release, > > type the hexcode, and then space-bar, e g, Ctrl + Shift + u, 2660, > > space-bar = ♠." > > > > Let me restate the problem. To produce those glyphs, I have to remember > > (or use a cheat sheet) the unicode numbers every time I want to use > > them. I don't know how you write, but when I get flowing with some > > ideas, I like to just keep going. To type a ✔, I have to stop, think > > about which unicode to use and type 8 key strokes. By then, my great > > idea could be lost and using 8 key strokes doesn't feel natural, > > particularly if my article jumps from sentences about ♠ and then to ♥ > > and then back to ♠ again. > > > > If I could bind or assign "Ctrl + Shift + u, then release, type the > > hexcode" (or the affect of that key combination) to my own choice of key > > (say, <Super_L>s ) I could then type along, use <Super_L>s to get a ♠ > > without hardly breaking stride. > > Well, its not a solution to your problem, but maybe a work around until some > of the sharp folks here can come up with one. Here is what I would like to see the sharp folks do to solve this. 1) Starting at the lowest level of the display hierarchy, create a shell command that is equivalent to <Ctrl><Shft>+U,+ unicode#. Lets call the command ucode with the following syntax ucode [option] unicode# (in hex, oct or decimal). $ ucode 2714 would return the ✔ on stdout. Perhaps it should be configured to work with 'echo' so that it can be used in shell scripts along with other characters. Options are not necessary, but programmers seem to like to complexify things. So lets add options for font and point size changes or whatever else. 2) Moving up a level, the ucode # command could be used to Bind a unicode output to a key or modified key in Xkeymap or readline etc. 3) Up another level to the desktop, the ucode # command could be recognized by Gnome, KDE or whatever. I use Gnome with metacity, but I used to use KDE a couple of years ago so I am pretty sure KDE has the same kind of key binding facility. In gnome-configuration-editor under applications metacity there is a "keybinding_commands" process which has "command_1, command_2, etc." where the user can enter a specific command. I would like to enter command_3 => ucode 2714. Then go to the metacity "global_keybindings" process and add <Super_L>y to command_3. Voila. 4) Up to the application level. All my applications run under Gnome e.g. OOo, Evolution, gTerminal, gedit, etc. should now recognize <Super_l> y as a checkmark. I acknowledge that is possible for a duplicate shortcut to be created by accident. A warning message should take care of that, and it is no more of a problem than already exists when created new shortcuts in any application. This process gives each user the freedom to create a glyph and/or accented character that persists and is meaningful to the user rather than being stuck with the choice of the original keyboard layout designer and shouldn't be difficult to implement. In my view the problem has always been to get a command that replicates keystrokes without having to climb the learning curve of 'expect' and attaching a full blown script. > > While typing with your ideas flowing just type in [check] for the check mark > above, or [SUPER_Lcheckmark] . This way you can go back once your done with > the ideas, and proof reading the doc, and replace the [whatever] sections > with the appropriate characters. then you could do a search and replace for > every instance of [SUPER_Lcheckmark] with ✔. > > Like I said, not a "solution" but, I'd hate for your ideas to go away waiting > on all those keystrokes. (I DO know how you feel!) > I don't know if this is a practical solution; I am not a programmer and have been using Linux/OOo for only 2½ years. So read the above suggestion as directions to where I want to go, not particularly as a suggestion of how to get there. -- Regards Bill --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
