[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Dead keys in X.



Paulo J. da Silva e Silva wrote:

> Jens B. Jorgensen writes:
>  > I'd like to help you out, and I'll try to do so. I think you can get the X's XKB to do
>  > your bidding in this case, but I'm not sure. Pardon my ignorance but what are 'dead
>  > keys'?
>  >
>
> Thank you for your attention.
>
> Dead keys are keys that don't get processed when typed, but wait for the next
> key to decide which code must be generated. This is what emacs
> iso-accents-mode does.
>
> As an exemple, consider you want to get the "á". When you type the acute no
> code is generated, the keyboard waits the next key. If it is something that
> could be composed with the acute accent then the keyboard delivers the
> accented character (then if you type a you'll get á). If it doesn't make sense
> to compose the keyboard delivers the acute followed by the next keystroke.
>
> I am not sure if this can be accomplished by using XKB. I have already read
> something over the net that X doesn't support dead keys directly (but the
> text was rather technical and I couldn't understand completely). Another point
> is that the authors of diacrd patch seem to understand what they were doing
> (in fact they criticize their solution, saying that the patch should be better
> written using modules and so). Anyway if we can get XKB to do it for me it
> would be great and I could share the solution with some people I know that is
> having the same problem.

Ok, so that's what dead keys are. I believe the XKEYBOARD extension does just what you want.
I believe if you use the xfree86(pt) keymap you'll get what you want. This is supposed to be
the common Purtugese layout according to the config files. The XKB extension *does* support
dead keys. The config files aren't well documented but just try this and get back to me and
tell me how it went.

--
Jens B. Jorgensen
jjorgens@bdsinc.com



--  
Unsubscribe?  mail -s unsubscribe debian-user-request@lists.debian.org < /dev/null


Reply to: