home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Date: Mon, 20 Jun 94 03:15 BST-1
- From: Ofir Gal <ogal@cix.compulink.co.uk>
- Subject: Re: LTMF and dialog standards?
- To: gem-list@world.std.com
- Message-Id: <memo.425094@cix.compulink.co.uk>
- Precedence: bulk
-
-
- In-Reply-To: <m0qFO3E-0001VeC@bitsink.gbdata.com>
-
-
- In message <m0qFO3E-0001VeC@bitsink.gbdata.com>, khollis@bitsink.gbdata.com said:
- >
- >I saw you posting some interesting things about program standards for
- >word processors and such, but why not start a standard of keyboard
- >equivalents and such for dialog boxes? LTMF could really benefit from
- >some set standards, and since there are no real set standards (except
- >for UNDO and HELP which are minimal), it would be nice to get some
- >put into the program; and since I'm recoding LTMF, now would be the
- >prime time to negotiate those standards!
-
- I am looking forward to the next version of LTMF. I think it should follow
- the guidelines re text editing in the same way as text editor:
-
- CTRL X Cut
- CTRL C Copy
- Shift+CTRL C Append/Add (to clipboard)
- CTRL V Paste
-
- CTRL BS Delete word to left
- CTRL Del Delete word to right
- Shift+CTRL Del Delete to end of line *
- Shift+CTRL BS Delete from start of line *
- CTRL Y Delete line **
- ESC Delete line
- Delete Delete char right of cursor
- BS Delete char left of cursor
-
- Insert Toggle Insert/Overwrite mode
-
- Shift CTRL Z Charmap (text processor/editor)
-
- * New idea
- ** Don't know if this is needed in a dialogue
-
- The last one is currently Shift+Insert. I suggest you wait for the outcome
- of the vote especially as Shift+CTRL are new suggestions and have not been
- discussed yet. Are you happy with the above?
-
- There's still the issue of how the Undo button should work in dialogue and
- I think there are differences between modal dialogues (where LTMF Undo may
- be used) and nonmodal ones.
-
- All toolkit maintainers out there will have to change their code a little.
-
-
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
- Although this has been discussed I have not used the categories - Reserved,
- Recommneded, etc. Maybe someone could take my last proposal and edit it.
-
- On another note - what about the "GEM List Compliant" logo idea? Maybe
- someone here is good at drawing icons... I think that we should have levels
- of compliance, for example:
-
- G1 - GEM List level 1 compatible - Follows the keyboard shortcut guide
- G2 - GEM List level 2 compatible - As above, but also supports the conf file
-
- This will allow developers a gradual change to the new standard.
-
-
- Bye,
-
- Ofir ogal@cix.compulink.co.uk
-
-