Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site yetti.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utcs!mnetor!yetti!oz
From: oz@yetti.UUCP (Ozan Yigit)
Newsgroups: net.emacs
Subject: Re: Proposal for key bindings (short)
Message-ID: <370@yetti.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 29-Apr-86 16:37:07 EDT
Article-I.D.: yetti.370
Posted: Tue Apr 29 16:37:07 1986
Date-Received: Tue, 29-Apr-86 19:10:08 EDT
References: <571@tjalk.UUCP>
Reply-To: oz@yetti.UUCP (Ozan Yigit)
Organization: York University Computer Science
Lines: 36
Keywords: common bindings, emacs
Summary: 

Dick Grune & company posted a proposal for a "minimal" compatibility
bindings, which, I think, is an excellent idea. (Oh brother.. now
watch for the flooood in net.emacs !!! :-) Considering the
number of functions Emacs & like editors have, plus all the exotic
bindings that can be created, a minimal set of common bindings is
the only way to ensure swithover from one brand of emacs to another
without loss of productivity.

I have, however, few reservations about how this set of bindings are
determined:
	- various emacs & like editors considered, but it seems all
	  had equal weight in the final set. If this is the case,
	  very popular emacs bindings are effected by those that may
	  not be as popular. My impression is that the bindings
	  available in GNUemacs, GoslingEmacs & Jove should have more
	  *bias* in the final set of common bindings than, say
	  scame & microemacs. [Btw. I consider the Conroy version as
	  the only true-microemacs.]

	- Other emacses *must* be considered. There are several other
	  emacs-like editors in the market, along with others floating
	  in the circuit: Elle and Montgomery's. Perhaps people on this
	  newsgroup would provide the necessary binding information.


I have not had the time to consider the proposed bindings, so nothing
to say there. I hope a minimally complete set of bindings could be
found. (Will it be called common-emacs ?? Perhaps anything that does
not include the eventually-found-common-bindings should come with a
warning from surgeon-general :-))

oZ
-- 
The best way to have a 		Usenet: [decvax|ihnp4]!utzoo!yetti!oz
good idea is to have a 		Bitnet: oz@[yusol|yuyetti].BITNET
lot of ideas.			Phonet: [416] 667-3976