Re: Review compose key sequence patches January 3rd and 6th
On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 18:37:41 +0100, Pander wrote: Multi_key o x : ?? currency # CURRENCY SIGN Multi_key x o : ?? currency # CURRENCY SIGN +Multi_key o X : ?? currency # CURRENCY SIGN +Multi_key X o : ?? currency # CURRENCY SIGN +Multi_key O X : ?? currency # CURRENCY SIGN +Multi_key X O : ?? currency # CURRENCY SIGN +Multi_key O x : ?? currency # CURRENCY SIGN +Multi_key x O : ?? currency # CURRENCY SIGN Do we really need 11 sequences for this one keysym, 8 of which are almost the same? That seems rather silly. Cheers, Julien ___ xorg-devel@lists.x.org: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
Re: Review compose key sequence patches January 3rd and 6th
On 2012-02-22 17:32, Pander wrote: On 2012-02-22 16:31, Alan Coopersmith wrote: On 02/22/12 03:12 AM, Pander wrote: On 2012-02-22 01:26, James Cloos wrote: [Did I already send a review?] No not yet. Thanks for following up on this. Some initial thoughts: +Multi_key 0 c : © copyright # COPYRIGHT SIGN Is it really useful to use0 (zero) for that whenO (majuscule oh) ando (miniscule oh) are already there? This allows users to enter copyright sign without using SHIFT.c 0 of0 c would be the fastest way to enter this sign which is used regularly. This also applies to the next less often used signs. How is that any faster or less involving of the shift key than the current Multi_key o c ? Indeed not faster than that one. It is an alternative way, which is as fast but also possible in reverse order, which the o c is not. The compose key sequences with 0 (zero) for §, ¤ and © originate from gtk-compose-lookaside.txt which is being maintained by Simos Xenitellis. Simon, can you give additional justification for the following 12 lines: +Multi_key 0 c : © copyright # COPYRIGHT SIGN +Multi_key 0 C : © copyright # COPYRIGHT SIGN +Multi_key c 0 : © copyright # COPYRIGHT SIGN +Multi_key C 0 : © copyright # COPYRIGHT SIGN +Multi_key s 0 : § section # SECTION SIGN +Multi_key 0 s : § section # SECTION SIGN +Multi_key S 0 : § section # SECTION SIGN +Multi_key 0 S : § section # SECTION SIGN +Multi_key 0 X : ¤ currency # CURRENCY SIGN +Multi_key X 0 : ¤ currency # CURRENCY SIGN +Multi_key 0 x : ¤ currency # CURRENCY SIGN +Multi_key x 0 : ¤ currency # CURRENCY SIGN Or are you willing to drop them from gtk-compose-lookaside.txt? Note that §, ¤ and © already have enough exiting compose key sequences and the ones under consideration are not the most obvious sequences for these characters. In case of dropping them from gtk-compose-lookaside.txt they will also be dropped from my X-GTK-consolidation patch. Regards, Pander PS I have made a simple Python script that used while preparing the patch for finding inconsistencies in Compose.pre. You can find it here http://pastebin.com/5nzQK8n4 and you will see the number of warnings and errors drop by applying the patch. A new patch for final review has been submitted here: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18751 The 10 lines which were labelled as not needed have been removed. The new patch has been made against git head of 2012-03-02. Please do a final review this patch and the patch: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44312 on which were no comments. Again, this will eliminate much of the differences between GTK and X11 compose key sequences which is long overdue. Please contact me if I can be of any assistance. Regards, Pander ___ xorg-devel@lists.x.org: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel ___ xorg-devel@lists.x.org: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
Re: Review compose key sequence patches January 3rd and 6th
On 03/ 2/12 07:52 AM, Pander wrote: A new patch for final review has been submitted here: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18751 While we're not always speedy at review on xorg-devel, patches mailed to the list tend to get reviewed and applied months or years faster than those stuck in bugzilla. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@oracle.com Oracle Solaris Engineering - http://blogs.oracle.com/alanc ___ xorg-devel@lists.x.org: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
Re: Review compose key sequence patches January 3rd and 6th
On 2012-02-22 01:26, James Cloos wrote: [Did I already send a review?] No not yet. Thanks for following up on this. Some initial thoughts: +Multi_key 0 c: © copyright # COPYRIGHT SIGN Is it really useful to use 0 (zero) for that when O (majuscule oh) and o (miniscule oh) are already there? This allows users to enter copyright sign without using SHIFT. c 0 of 0 c would be the fastest way to enter this sign which is used regularly. This also applies to the next less often used signs. That also applies to § section and ¤ currency. These (©, § and ¤) originate from gtk-compose-lookaside.txt with the purpose to be merged here, upstream. They do not interfere with other schemes concerning 0 (zero). My motivation for these is to consolidate the exceptions currently defined by Simos in GTK (and GNOME) so all flavours of X will use the ones defined in Compose.pre This was also the goal of gtk-compose-lookaside.txt but that file grew over the years without merging upstream. Now it is time to start merging and hopefully get rid of it completely. +Multi_key exclam p : ¶ paragraph # PILCROW SIGN +Multi_key exclam P : ¶ paragraph # PILCROW SIGN The logic of the current Multi_key sequences (Multi_key exclam is DOT BELOW for all current sequences where it preceses a letter) would suggest that those two would be used for the strings p̣ and P̣. Goog finds hits in wikipedia¹ (representing the IPA /pʼ/ in Riggs’ and Williamson’s orthographies for Sioux), a usage in chemical symbols and some hits which suggest that it may be used in latin transcriptions of one or more of the script of India. Agreed, these two need to be removed from the patch. Other wise it looks good and applies. With the caveats above, Reviewed-by: James Cloos cl...@jhcloos.com Thank you for the review. What are now the next steps for the patches in http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel/2012-January/028253.html and http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel/2012-January/028432.html Regards, Pander 1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sioux_language http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/P%CC%A3 -JimC ___ xorg-devel@lists.x.org: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
Re: Review compose key sequence patches January 3rd and 6th
On 02/22/12 03:12 AM, Pander wrote: On 2012-02-22 01:26, James Cloos wrote: [Did I already send a review?] No not yet. Thanks for following up on this. Some initial thoughts: +Multi_key 0 c : © copyright # COPYRIGHT SIGN Is it really useful to use0 (zero) for that whenO (majuscule oh) ando (miniscule oh) are already there? This allows users to enter copyright sign without using SHIFT.c 0 of0 c would be the fastest way to enter this sign which is used regularly. This also applies to the next less often used signs. How is that any faster or less involving of the shift key than the current Multi_key o c ? -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@oracle.com Oracle Solaris Engineering - http://blogs.oracle.com/alanc ___ xorg-devel@lists.x.org: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
Re: Review compose key sequence patches January 3rd and 6th
On 2012-02-22 16:31, Alan Coopersmith wrote: On 02/22/12 03:12 AM, Pander wrote: On 2012-02-22 01:26, James Cloos wrote: [Did I already send a review?] No not yet. Thanks for following up on this. Some initial thoughts: +Multi_key 0 c : © copyright # COPYRIGHT SIGN Is it really useful to use0 (zero) for that whenO (majuscule oh) ando (miniscule oh) are already there? This allows users to enter copyright sign without using SHIFT.c 0 of0 c would be the fastest way to enter this sign which is used regularly. This also applies to the next less often used signs. How is that any faster or less involving of the shift key than the current Multi_key o c ? Indeed not faster than that one. It is an alternative way, which is as fast but also possible in reverse order, which the o c is not. The compose key sequences with 0 (zero) for §, ¤ and © originate from gtk-compose-lookaside.txt which is being maintained by Simos Xenitellis. Simon, can you give additional justification for the following 12 lines: +Multi_key 0 c: © copyright # COPYRIGHT SIGN +Multi_key 0 C: © copyright # COPYRIGHT SIGN +Multi_key c 0: © copyright # COPYRIGHT SIGN +Multi_key C 0: © copyright # COPYRIGHT SIGN +Multi_key s 0: § section # SECTION SIGN +Multi_key 0 s: § section # SECTION SIGN +Multi_key S 0: § section # SECTION SIGN +Multi_key 0 S: § section # SECTION SIGN +Multi_key 0 X: ¤ currency # CURRENCY SIGN +Multi_key X 0: ¤ currency # CURRENCY SIGN +Multi_key 0 x: ¤ currency # CURRENCY SIGN +Multi_key x 0: ¤ currency # CURRENCY SIGN Or are you willing to drop them from gtk-compose-lookaside.txt? Note that §, ¤ and © already have enough exiting compose key sequences and the ones under consideration are not the most obvious sequences for these characters. In case of dropping them from gtk-compose-lookaside.txt they will also be dropped from my X-GTK-consolidation patch. Regards, Pander PS I have made a simple Python script that used while preparing the patch for finding inconsistencies in Compose.pre. You can find it here http://pastebin.com/5nzQK8n4 and you will see the number of warnings and errors drop by applying the patch. ___ xorg-devel@lists.x.org: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
Re: Review compose key sequence patches January 3rd and 6th
[Did I already send a review?] Some initial thoughts: +Multi_key 0 c: © copyright # COPYRIGHT SIGN Is it really useful to use 0 (zero) for that when O (majuscule oh) and o (miniscule oh) are already there? That also applies to § section and ¤ currency. +Multi_key exclam p : ¶ paragraph # PILCROW SIGN +Multi_key exclam P : ¶ paragraph # PILCROW SIGN The logic of the current Multi_key sequences (Multi_key exclam is DOT BELOW for all current sequences where it preceses a letter) would suggest that those two would be used for the strings p̣ and P̣. Goog finds hits in wikipedia¹ (representing the IPA /pʼ/ in Riggs’ and Williamson’s orthographies for Sioux), a usage in chemical symbols and some hits which suggest that it may be used in latin transcriptions of one or more of the script of India. Other wise it looks good and applies. With the caveats above, Reviewed-by: James Cloos cl...@jhcloos.com 1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sioux_language http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/P%CC%A3 -JimC -- James Cloos cl...@jhcloos.com OpenPGP: 1024D/ED7DAEA6 ___ xorg-devel@lists.x.org: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
Review compose key sequence patches January 3rd and 6th
Hi all, Could someone review the patches I have submitted on the 3rd and 6th of January? http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel/2012-January/028253.html and http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel/2012-January/028432.html A lot of work went into the second patch so I would be pleased to hear your feedback. Thanks, Pander ___ xorg-devel@lists.x.org: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
