On Wed, Feb 23, 2000 at 12:37:16PM -0800, Jim Lynch wrote: > I really don't understand how this key combination is generic. Branden, > originally you said something like X offers mechanism, not policy, and > this statement has been made before. I would add that it also does not > specify UI. That's what "mechanism, not policy" means. > Please correct me if I'm wrong in the following statements, and refer > me to some reading material in any case: > > - No key combination is special to an X server, none at all. (not > true if for example ctrl-alt-backspace is special to the server) True in general, with special exceptions. The one you mentioned, plus CTRL-ALT-Fn for VT switching. Both these special sequences can be disabled (and thus passed to clients) with appropriate parameters supplied in XF86COnfig. > - Key combinations that are not recognized by the frontmost client > are always propigated rearward, (visual heirarchy) eventually reaching > the background screen, ("object" heirarchy) AKA the x server itself. I think this actually depends on proper client programming. A poorly coded client can, I think, catch events it isn't going to use instead of passing them down the list. > - The specific combination ctrl-shift-1 (isn't this the same as ctrl-! ?) > is not handled specially by the x server; therefore, in order for it > to be handled specially at all, a client would have to handle it in some > specific way, and in addition, the key combination would have to (somehow) > reach the specific client, being passed to it if necessary by some other > client. Yes. -- G. Branden Robinson | Religion is something left over from the Debian GNU/Linux | infancy of our intelligence; it will branden@ecn.purdue.edu | fade away as we adopt reason and science roger.ecn.purdue.edu/~branden/ | as our guidelines. -- Bertrand Russell
Attachment:
pgpprS6M6Molg.pgp
Description: PGP signature