AW: AW: making fallback access keys configurable

[Tobias Anton]

> this is offset by the case where few people find the
> feature useful and it generally just gets in the way.

A significant problem about KDE development is that one makes a patch,
nobody cares, it gets into some releases, and then another developer
complains and proposes another behaviour which often is different to both
previous versions. The last step causes most damage in the user's trust and
he eventually decides to use a More Stable (TM) desktop environment.

But I'm not neutral anyway because I helped in reviewing the accesskeys
stuff. Also, I've never been disturbed by the accesskeys until now and I
doubt the majority of users is. If you have evidence of the opposite, please
let us know. Also consider that disabled people may _rely_ on that feature
now that it is available, so that their loss in trust exceeds the gain in
utility for those who feel disturbed by far. If the ratio way, say, 1:20,
you'd need twenty times more disturbed users than disabled ones to justify
your argument.

> (note that the total sum of people on the this list falls far below the 
> threshold for "a few people" in the scope of our user base)

But since this list is populated by experts that know far more about the
internals of KDE as the average user does (and should), it is unlikely that
the votes on this list reflect the opinion of the user base.

What I don't understand: Why do you want to revert a user interface change
that someone implemented with a specific idea in mind? Wouldn't it perhaps
suffice for you to simply disable accesskeys in your config? 

Tobias