Re: Again: please clarify the decision on IBus integration

[Aron Xu <aronxu gnome org>]

On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 11:21 PM, Lanoxx <lanoxx gmx net> wrote:
>
> On 09/07/12 17:11, Florian Müllner wrote:
>
>
> On Jul 9, 2012 4:52 PM, "Rui Tiago Cação Matos" <tiagomatos gmail com>
> wrote:
>> If you start offloading keybindings and other
>> configurations then how do you make sure that the UI will be
>> consistent with the remaining GNOME UI?
>
> Particularly for keybindings it's not merely about UI consistency - parallel
> keybindings configuration means the responsibility for resolving conflicting
> settings is left entirely to users (and of course they'll need to figure out
> first that this is the reason for stuff not working as expected)
>
> To give a concrete example of this. I have German, English and Chinese IM
> installed. But I also use Eclipse very often. On a newly installed system I
> find that the Short Cut `ctrl` + `space` in Eclipse (which activates the
> Autocomplete Feature) collides with the activation short cut for ibus. I
> usually then deactivate this ibus short cut to get eclipse working again.
>
> IMHO, as an end user I would prefer if the short cuts were handled by gnome
> because then I would be notified if there is a conflicting definition of the
> same short cut for different functions.
>

For a second time, I know it's good to handle shortcut in a
centralized way so that conflicts can be handled much better. But to
accomplish such an aim, we need standards that everyone obeys, not
only GNOME, nor IMFs. Shortcut collisions happen everyday, and you
arer more likely to meet collisions when you use input methods because
they are using many shortcuts and you aren't clear about many of them.
But a concrete proposal to solve this concrete example is not the way
proposed on git.gnome.org right now, because there are
misunderstanding of what's IMF and how it works.

--
Regards,
Aron Xu