Re: Suggestion: Mapping of M-g should be goto-line

[Kim F. Storm]

Richard Stallman <address@hidden> writes:

>     > I chose the M-g binding for that reason, and the reason continues to
>     > have force.  So I don't intend to change that binding.
> 
>     I can't see the particular mnemonic value of that binding.
> 
> M-g is not mnemonic.  It is not a very good binding, but it seemed to
> be the best that was available.  If you can suggest a better binding
> for the text property commands, I could agree to moving them.

If we look for a binding for "text processor" modes only, it would be
more logical to have the face bindings on, e.g.

        C-c C-b => bold
        C-c C-a => italic   (easier to type that C-c C-i)
        C-c C-d => default
        etc.

These are currently unbound in text-mode.

This may (haven't checked) conflict with existing bindings in other
text-related modes eg. enriched-text-mode or tex-mode, and also be
shadowed by C-c bindings in other modes derived from text-mode.

-- 
Kim F. Storm <address@hidden> http://www.cua.dk