On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 01:26:10PM +0100, Dirk Wallenstein wrote: > > what would be the difference to having an additional group that triggers > > only those "shortcut" keysyms (XF86Back, XF86Forward, XF86Whatnot)? > > None. The point of this example together with the example 3 is that I > would like to make the functionalities the window managers offer > easily available, say, to the 10 fingered office worker. > shortcuts for switching applications and desktops is just one example. > > I, for example, have a usual western keyboard with this huge space-bar > and the lack of modifiers at the tips of my pointing fingers. Now, with > the need for Shift, Control, Alt and AltGr on each side of the space > bar there's no space left for a group switch and so I have all sorts > of two-modifier-plus-trigger-key shortcuts to use WM functionality. My > next keyboard will be an Asian one, where they have separate keys for > the pointing finger in the lowest row. I would like to enable the > aforementioned office worker (well, I could use that too, then), to > configure these keys as he likes. > > The gist is that it should not be necessary to edit keymaps manually, > and accomplish things that are simply not possible by means or > rearranging keysyms.
[...] > But honestly, I think it would be a real improvement if users could > define their own keymaps with the full range of tools that XKB > provides. I skipped the other parts, because your last sentence sums it up perfectly: we need better configuration tools. XKB from a users POV suffers more from the lack of configuration tools, less so from the protoco/implementation. For what you seem to be proposing in this thread, the focus should thus be on the client application to enable flexible (and persistent) custom configuration. Think of an XKB-aware xmodmap, that will be the core of it. Once that application is working, we can re-visit and see what actual deficiencies are in the protocol/implementation. I still think you can can get about 80-90% there without having to touch XKB (the protocol) itself. However, the XKB implementation certainly isn't without fail so don't hesitate to submit patches that improve it. Cheers, Peter _______________________________________________ xorg mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg
