[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#17362: 24.4.50; inconsistent key notation: `ESC' vs `<ESC>'
From: |
Drew Adams |
Subject: |
bug#17362: 24.4.50; inconsistent key notation: `ESC' vs `<ESC>' |
Date: |
Tue, 29 Apr 2014 08:40:52 -0700 (PDT) |
> - If a key does not have a label, its name should be in all caps,
> as in @key{TAB} or @key{META}.
>
> - There are 2 exceptions to the last 2 rules, both for historical
> reasons:
>
> * @key{BACKSPACE}, although many keyboards have a "Backspace"
> label on it.
>
> * @key{ESC}, which is labeled "Esc".
Eli, are you saying that you have replaced <delete>, <backspace>, etc.
everywhere with <DELETE>, <BACKSPACE>, etc., or that you think it is
appropriate to do so?
Seems like that would be a big change from the past and a change from
how Emacs itself communicates with users. AFAIK, Emacs writes <delete>
for the Delete key etc. The rule for function keys and pseudo function
keys has always been to use lowercase (in angle brackets), no?
I thought that we used uppercase only for the ASCII control chars: TAB,
RET, ESC, and DEL, and not for key sequences involving pseudo function
keys <tab> and <backspace>. (I also thought that we specifically did
NOT enclose the former in angle brackets, but I guess that's another
story.)
You will perhaps say that <TAB> refers only to the keyboard key, and
not to an Emacs key sequence. In that case, it should not appear as
part of a key sequence notation, IMO.
And I would have thought that the keyboard keys would anyway be
written the same as they are on the keyboard: Tab, Backspace, Delete,
Esc, not <TAB>, <BACKSPACE>, <DELETE>, <ESC>.
It seems to me that:
1. The way Emacs talks to users, via `kbd', `edmacro-parse-keys', and
help output in general should not be changed.
2. The doc (manual) should follow the same conventions as `kbd',
`edmacro-parse-keys' and help output in general.
I am more concerned about #1 than #2. I don't actually see you
proposing any change wrt #1 so far, which is good.
I do not, however, see a good reason why Emacs doc (manuals) should
represent key sequences differently than Emacs help does. That kind
of goes against Occam's razor, multiplying things unnecessarily.
Let me know if I am misunderstanding something. I admit to feeling
a bit confused now by the various notations. I thought it was pretty
straightforward: just ASCII control char names (uppercase), function
keys and pseudo function keys (lowercase, in angle brackets). It no
longer seems so straightforward and simple.
- bug#17362: 24.4.50; inconsistent key notation: `ESC' vs `<ESC>', Drew Adams, 2014/04/28
- bug#17362: 24.4.50; inconsistent key notation: `ESC' vs `<ESC>', Dani Moncayo, 2014/04/28
- bug#17362: 24.4.50; inconsistent key notation: `ESC' vs `<ESC>', Drew Adams, 2014/04/28
- bug#17362: 24.4.50; inconsistent key notation: `ESC' vs `<ESC>', Eli Zaretskii, 2014/04/29
- bug#17362: 24.4.50; inconsistent key notation: `ESC' vs `<ESC>',
Drew Adams <=
- bug#17362: 24.4.50; inconsistent key notation: `ESC' vs `<ESC>', Eli Zaretskii, 2014/04/29
- bug#17362: 24.4.50; inconsistent key notation: `ESC' vs `<ESC>', Drew Adams, 2014/04/29
- bug#17362: 24.4.50; inconsistent key notation: `ESC' vs `<ESC>', Eli Zaretskii, 2014/04/29
- bug#17362: 24.4.50; inconsistent key notation: `ESC' vs `<ESC>', Drew Adams, 2014/04/29
- bug#17362: 24.4.50; inconsistent key notation: `ESC' vs `<ESC>', Eli Zaretskii, 2014/04/29
- bug#17362: 24.4.50; inconsistent key notation: `ESC' vs `<ESC>', Drew Adams, 2014/04/29
- bug#17362: 24.4.50; inconsistent key notation: `ESC' vs `<ESC>', Eli Zaretskii, 2014/04/29
- bug#17362: 24.4.50; inconsistent key notation: `ESC' vs `<ESC>', Eli Zaretskii, 2014/04/29
- bug#17362: 24.4.50; inconsistent key notation: `ESC' vs `<ESC>', Drew Adams, 2014/04/29
- bug#17362: 24.4.50; inconsistent key notation: `ESC' vs `<ESC>', Eli Zaretskii, 2014/04/29