[RkWard-devel] Window navigation

[Thomas Friedrichsmeier]

On Friday 02 March 2007 09:44, Prasenjit Kapat wrote:
> 1. Use  Ctl + [ and Ctl + ] keys (like konqueror) to cycle thru the
> script/help file tabs on the top. Alt instead of Ctl, <> instead of []?

I went with Alt+<>. No strong opinion on this though. Did not use the Ctrl+[], 
as in konqueror navigation really works left/right between the tabs, not 
next/previous, so I thought it best to pick a different shortcut for a 
different type of navigation.

> 2a) For the tool windows, I prefer a kate like approach. Use F4, F5,F6 and
> F7 to "activate (and pull up) / deactivate (and hide down)" the four tool
> windows like a toggle switch.

I went with Alt+12345 and Alt+0 for the document window (the latter can not be 
shown/hidden in a meaningful way, only given the focus). We already use F8 
and F9 for a rather different purpose, so I figured it was best to pick 
something distinct.

> 3) A single key (say, Alt + /) might toggle focus between the script/help
> tabs and the tool tabs. Then use the same key combo to cycle thru them.
>
> My whole concern in trying to separate the windows into two different sets
> is so that, R Console/ Help search is easily accessible from the script
> file tabs. The user should not need to cycle thru all the windows.

I set those aside for the moment. I think, if we go along those lines, then 
we'd really only include the document windows in the "Next/Previous Window" 
actions. Probably there is not too much use for cycling between the tool 
windows, anyway, as they can be activated directly. What I like about the 
current solution is that you can use the combination Alt+< and Alt+> to 
switch back and forth between any two windows.

What does everybody else think? Should the "Next / Previous Window" actions 
include the tool windows, or better just the document windows (i.e. scripts, 
data, help, anything else shown in the main window area)?

> And in the long run, if possible, even these key choices might be
> configurable by the user. Again, these are my personal views.

Yes, this will be needed sooner or later, but isn't a short term thing.

Regards
Thomas
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/rkward-devel/attachments/20070306/be8a3ab7/attachment.sig>