Difference between revisions of "Talk:Keymapping Improvements"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m |
|||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
* Maybe there should be a way for the backend to report what buttons (if any) it binds to the actions so that the help screens can contain accurate information? (After all, the help screens are generated by the engine, not the backend.) | * Maybe there should be a way for the backend to report what buttons (if any) it binds to the actions so that the help screens can contain accurate information? (After all, the help screens are generated by the engine, not the backend.) | ||
--[[User:Marcus|Marcus]] 17:28, 1 July 2007 (CEST) | |||
Revision as of 15:28, 1 July 2007
Some random thoughts:
- I suppose the list of available actions would have to be ordered somehow. If there are 20 actions and 7 buttons, you need to know which choice of 7 that makes the most sense. Possibly just picking the 7 first would be enough if the list is ordered that way.
- The gradual conversion scheme has a problem: It means that buttons would have to be assigned _both_ to hardcoded keys (such as F5), and to the new actions. On the DC, all buttons are already taken by hardcoded keys, so unless these can be removed there is no space to map the new actions.
- The precense of a text description of the actions allow for the creation of a popup menu to select actions from if not enough buttons are available. This is good for the DC backend, as I have reserved a trigger for the purpose of summoning such an action menu.
- Maybe there should be a way for the backend to report what buttons (if any) it binds to the actions so that the help screens can contain accurate information? (After all, the help screens are generated by the engine, not the backend.)
--Marcus 17:28, 1 July 2007 (CEST)