On 4/14/06, Alan Horkan <horkana@...44...> wrote:
What Inkscape has _now_ is very very far from Sodipodi :) And it's always being developed and expanded, changing with every version.
I was assuming you mostly expanded rather than outright changed the keybindings but in case you did change things I suggested the alternative of a "classic" set of keybindings.
Yes, mostly expanded, as there was not a lot to change :) Anyway, this process should be user-driven. If after some of our changes, someone prefers old Inkscape bindings, he or she is welcome to submit the corresponding profile file and we'll include it in the list of alternatives. I see no reason for us to do this preventively. Why do a snapshot of 0.44 and not e.g. 0.43 or 0.45?
The Gnome HIG advises against trying to have keybindings for absolutely everything. I understand now why, because Inkscape has keybindings for just about everything it is very hard to add any new keybindings.
It would be ridiculous not to have convenient shortcuts for something widely used _now_ in anticipation of some other feature that will arrive years later and will need the same keys.
I see no reason not to have, at all times, a set of shortcuts that best reflects the current functionality of the program. Moreover, I think the fact that we had such a set from the beginning was a very important factor in Inkscape success.
Can it happen that we'll want to switch some shortcuts to different actions in the default set? Yes, absolutely. I see no tragedy in that, provided this is driven by the real needs of the users and is given good discussion by real everyday users of the program.
Is it true that some of the shortcuts were assigned to little-used commands that could easily do without keyboard access? Probably. But again, the practice and discussion is the best way to find it out, not blindly following some recommendations.
In fact, the primary value of the customizable profiles is exactly in this - to facilitate experimentation and encourage discussion. I will be happy to see more people tweaking their shortcuts and submitting their profiles, and to consider incorporating their proposals into the default set.
Is it true that the current default set has few unused keys left? Not really. Both single-letter and F-keys spaces for switching tools have plenty of room still, so we can easily accommodate many new tools. And within each tool, many of the existing keys will have easy to guess meanings, same or similar to those in other tools. We also have quite some room to grow in terms of improving consistency and always doing what the user expects, which often means adding more functionality to the existing keys used in new contexts, without having to use any new keyboard combinations.
I strongly believe the default keybindings should try to be easier for beginners to learn.
Absolutely. But the way to achieve this is not artificial limiting of shortcuts. This is best achieved through _consistency_. We are doing pretty well in this - in most situations, most keys behave in predictable ways. Though of course there's room for improvement.
Jasc Web Draw keybindings http://www.maths.tcd.ie/~horkana/inkscape/WebDraw_Keyboard_Shortcuts.html
This one is really small. I don't know if it's worth making a profile from. All of the things that we share already have the same keys, and the rest does not apply to us.
Macromedia Freehand keybindings http://www.maths.tcd.ie/~horkana/inkscape/freehand/FreeHandMX_keybindings.tx...
That one is helpful, with good explanations. Quite ripe for making a profile out of.
Adobe Illustrator Keybindings http://www.maths.tcd.ie/~horkana/inkscape/illustrator/Illustrator%20CS%20Def...
This one is less helpful, perhaps only a real Illustrator user can make sense of these.
I had a side by side list for Adobe and Macromedia in nicely formatted HTML around somewhere, I'll see if I can dig it up later.
That will be very useful.
-- bulia byak Inkscape. Draw Freely. http://www.inkscape.org