Calum Benson wrote:
Thanks for your answer Calum. Since you say that GNOME's 2.x keyboard was redesigned with the various desktops in mind and since Windows is by far the biggest competitor (and the one we really want to take users from) why was such things as I mentioned, and that are so important and familiar to many MS Windows users, why are those left out?On 22 Aug 2006, at 19:26, Mathias Dahl wrote:Lennart Borgman <lennart borgman 073 student lu se> writes:I currently use MS Windows. No big surprise I guess, that is what the majority of computer users do today. I am kind of fanatic about keyboard usage.Me too. And I have to say that in this area, Windows really shines (just for the record, I am a GNU/Linux + Gnome user and a quite vivid MS-critic). If I could get the same consistency under Gnome, it would be really nice.I'm pretty confident that GNOME actually has wider and more consistent keyboard coverage than Windows-- e.g. try moving splitter bars on Windows and see how far you get :) We tabulated all the keyboard behaviour of various desktops (including Windows) before we started, and designed GNOME's 2.x keyboard from the ground up with that information to hand.
Can you please explain the reasoning? Since there was a redesign I can not understand the arguments about internal consistency.
Please file bugs (with the keynav keyword) about any inconsistencies or holes you find in GNOME's keyboard navigability. (Note that "not the way Windows does it" doesn't necessarily mean it's inconsistent; internal consistency is generally more important here, especially from an accessibility viewpoint.)
Exactly what do you want me to do?
Cheeri, Calum.
Kind regards, L