Re: Key bindings proposal

[Chong Yidong]

Jason Rumney <address@hidden> writes:

>>> Beside that it would not solve the problem that Emacs on w32 does not
>>> allow people which needs sticky keys to use it, i.e. it does not allow
>>> access for some disabled people.
>> This is an appropriate issue, and the patch to handle it, independent of
>> the rebinding-the-Windows-key feature, would be welcome.
>
> You misunderstand the purpose of Lennart's patch. The ability to
> rebind the windows and alt keys on w32 is already there, and has been
> since about 1996.  Lennart's patch allows the user to forcibly reclaim
> keys that are being used for system wide functions, in a way that
> works for all keys (we already have a function that can reclaim some
> of those, but not Alt-Tab or some of the Windows key bindings).
> Lennart's patch is useful for users who continue to use the default of
> Alt bound to Meta as well as users who would prefer to move meta to
> one or both windows keys.

On X, Alt-TAB does not go to Emacs either; the window manager grabs it.
I don't understand why it's proper for Emacs to "reclaim" the key.  If
it's not desireable for Alt-TAB to switch windows, the logical solution
seems to be to tell the window manager to stop grabbing Alt-TAB, since
it's the window manager that's at "fault".

Also, I don't understand the relation between forcibly reclaiming
operating system keys and the claim about sticky keys not behaving
properly.  Sticky keys are handled by the operating system; Emacs should
not be able to tell (nor have to care) whether the `M-x' it received
came from a sticky key.  What am I missing?