[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: DOCBOOK: marking up keycaps according to their semantics
Let me see if I understand you. You are suggesting that the DTD be changed so that keycap can have a way of identifying certain keys that have functions that go beyond entering a character. You want to capture the semantic concept of a Ctrl key, so that it can be expressed by the stylesheets in many ways rather than as a literal key name, right? So for Emacs doc, a stylesheet would render it as "C", while another stylesheet would say "Ctrl". In other languages it could be translated by the gentext files. This would seem to apply to just a few keys, like Alt, Esc, Shift, and Ctrl at least. Maybe Enter as well? Or should it be for all the named keys, including Insert, Home, etc.? Were you thinking of an enumerated list of values for an attribute on keycap? Bob Stayton 400 Encinal Street Publications Architect Santa Cruz, CA 95060 Technical Publications voice: (831) 427-7796 The SCO Group fax: (831) 429-1887 email: bobs@sco.com On Sun, Mar 02, 2003 at 09:30:45PM +0100, Tobias Reif wrote: > Hi > > "Pragmatic Programmer" [1] Dave Thomas writes on his blog [2]: > > "[...] > Here's how the FAQ recommends you mark up the Emacs key sequence C-h C-f > (control H, followed by control F, which normally displays help on a > function). > > <keycombo action="seq"> > <keycombo action="simul"> > <keycap>C</keycap> > <keycap>h</keycap> > </keycombo> > <keycombo action="simul"> > <keycap>C</keycap> > <keycap>f</keycap> > </keycombo> > </keycombo> > > Whoa! Some markup! And at first sight, pretty logical: a keyboard > combination consisting of a sequence of two simultaneous key presses, > the first a 'C' and an 'h', the second a 'C' and an 'f'. > > Except, this isn't logical markup at all. It is some remarkably verbose > hybrid. It totally fails to convey the most important fact about the > keys you press, namely that you are pressing control and h, followed by > control and f. Instead, it simply encapsulates the Emacs convention of > showing an uppercase 'C' to mean control. > > And why is this bad? Because I want true logical markup. In LaTeX, I'd > define some macros to let me write > > \KeySeq{\Control{h} \Control{f}} > > This (to my mind) a lot easier to read and type. But more importantly, > it gives me the flexibility I need. Perhaps in online documentation I > want to use the 'C-h' convention. No problem, I just write the macro > appropriately and every control sequence is documented accordingly. If a > publication says that their standard for control keys is "^h ^f", then a > single change to the macro updates the whole document. And if I want to > use fancy pictures of keys, my macros can do that too. > [...]" > > I agree that there should be a way to markup the control key as control key. > If we choose what's printed on the key, then that would be Strg for > German keyboeards, Ctrl for english ones, etc. > role="control-ley" doesn't cut it either; it would work with one set of > transformation tools, but not with a different set. > > Tobi > > [1] http://www.pragmaticprogrammer.com/ > [2] http://pragprog.com/pragdave/ > [3] http://pragprog.com/pragdave/Bitches/LogicalMarkup.rdoc,v > > -- > http://www.pinkjuice.com/ > -- Bob Stayton 400 Encinal Street Publications Architect Santa Cruz, CA 95060 Technical Publications voice: (831) 427-7796 The SCO Group fax: (831) 429-1887 email: bobs@sco.com
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]