On 18.07.2002 18:19 Uhr, David W. Fenton wrote > That's the tip of the iceberg, Johannes, and why I was having some > difficulty understanding Robert's whole point in the first place. > > There is no hidden goldmine of unused keystroke combinations lurking in > ASCII, waiting to be exploited for use as additional metatools to add to > the 30-odd already available. Indeed, the basic confusion seems to be the > idea that there is no real difference between ASCII codes and keystroke > combinations, when in reality, the mapping between the two is highly > variable, despite certain conventional mappings.
I tend to agree with the fact that control key combos on the Mac cannot be used by just assigning ASCII codes, since they do not have any standard ASCII codes, as far as I can tell (see my other post). > > And I question the basic premise that having more metatool keys available > would be any kind of improvement. Adding the alpha keys was a big leap, > and a solid improvement. Doubling or tripling that just creates an > organizational and mnemonic challenge. I would disagree this this. It is not really about the total number, but if it was possible to have several layers of metatools on the alpha keys, it would be possible to invent a personal system of metatools that is easier to use. Ie, I would probably lay out my dynamics (for which I normally use the articulation tool) like this: f= f(forte) Shift-f= ff Control-f= fff p= p(iano) shift-p = pp control-p = ppp m= mf shift-m=mp You get the idea. Other combinations also come to mind, perhaps control-f for a reduced size f etc. How about 1=dot on notehead side, shift-1=dot on stemside. Especially in the articulation tool I frequently run out of metatools and would definitely welcome several layers. Naturally, if Expressions were autoplacing the problem would probably move to expressions rather than articulations. > One thing that would be nice would be if the shifted keys for the > metatools would switch the tool that was used. If, say, an unshifted > metatool key would be an articulation, while a control key combination > would be an expression, a control-shift key some other tool, etc. > Granted, there are more tools than there are possible shift states, but > if it were user configurable, one could choose the most commonly used > tools. I certainly like that idea a lot! The objection I can see against any such multilayer metatools is that you actually need to click the mouse as well in the relevant tools, so a combination like control-p will actually become quite difficult to use. Johannes -- http://www.musikmanufaktur.com http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
