home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
Atari Mega Archive 1
/
Atari Mega Archive - Volume 1.iso
/
lists
/
gem
/
l_0399
/
237
< prev
next >
Wrap
Internet Message Format
|
1994-08-27
|
3KB
Date: Wed, 1 Jun 94 16:24 BST-1
From: Andre Willey <andre@cix.compulink.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Shortcut Manager
To: gem-list@world.std.com
Message-Id: <memo.262762@cix.compulink.co.uk>
Precedence: bulk
In-Reply-To: <9406011316.AA06508=avg@mijt.cwi.nl>
> That's why I suggested a wind_get or cookie call instead of the fishy
> resource editing stuff: you can make changes globally. Now if you
> add some kind of separation between types of application (editor,
> word, graphics, compiler) then all applications should be happy as
> well).
Better still (and trying to avoid over-thinking the plumbing, if possible)
how about a system text file, rather like ASSIGN.SYS, NEWDESK.INF, etc,
which contains the user's preferred shortcuts. A default file could be
created which pretty much mirrors the contents of our final standard - or
indeed *is* the final result of our work? The user could then change their
own local copy as required - for example to allocate 'Select All' to some
other key sequence. :-)
Each application which supported this new system would simply read the text
file during its installation process, and pick out any shortcuts that it has
a use for.
For example, a small section of this proposed SHORTCUT.INF file:
0 ^Q ; Quit
1 ^A ; Select All
2 ^W ; Cycle Windows
The code numbers at the start of each line would be defined as part of our
spec, and used by each application to determine what type of command is being
defined on each line. The comment after the ';' would thus be for user-
information only, and could be in any desired language - the code and the
keypress are all that would be needed to parse the file.
Thus a program would parse the above file, and if the program supports a
'Quit' option, it would assign the shortcut ^Q to it. Any specialised features
which are not defined in the shortcut file would not be reassigned from the
program's defaults (unless a conflict occurs, in which case the user should
be warned).
This strikes me as both very simple and yet very flexible. It would be easy
to add new options to the standard (via this list) as new features are
designed - but only programs which support a given feature would bother to
check the shortcuts file for it. It's also so simple that even a user could
understand it - although a nice neat editor could be written if desired.
Any comments?
Andre
+------------------------------------+-------------------------------+
| Andre Willey | Cygnus Software Development |
| Email: andre@cix.compulink.co.uk | Sutton Coldfield -- England |
| or: ...{mcsun}!uknet!cix!andre | Tel: (UK/+44) 021 308 5251 |
+------------------------------------+-------------------------------+