Re: lynx-dev Link numbering and keypad mode

[Bela Lubkin]

Kim DeVaughn wrote:

> Is anyone besides myself annoyed at the coupling between link and/or
> form field [numbering], and keypad key usage as either numbers or
> arrows?
> 
> These are two distinctly different things, and I can see no good
> reason for one to affect the other.
> 
> Currently we have the following o(ptions) for "keypad mode":
> 
>   Keypad mode:  Numbers act as arrows
>                 Links are numbered
>                 Links and form fields are numbered
> 
> 
> It seems to me (aka, I would prefer) having these options decoupled,
> so that we would have something like:
> 
>      Keypad mode:  Keys act as numbers
>                    Keys act as arrows
> 
> and
> 
>   Link numbering:  Not numbered
>                    Links are numbered
>                    Links and form fields are numbered

I agree with your suggestion.  Let me try to restate it in terms that
might be more understandable to some of the people who are objecting...

Basically the idea is to decouple this option, resulting in two new
options:

  [1] Keypad acts as:    numbers  OR  arrows
  [2] Link numbers are:  hidden   OR  displayed

The current behaviors would stay the same.  However, a new combination
would become available: link numbers are displayed, but keypad acts as
arrows.

Note that in keypad-as-arrows mode, there is an escape to get to keypad-
as-numbers mode: hit "0".  Also, as Ismael Cordeiro points out, the
keypad is automatically understood as numbers in places where that makes
sense (anywhere you can enter text -- usually form fields).

So what [1] really represents is whether you need to prefix a link
number with a "0" before issuing a follow-link, go-to-link, or go-to-
page command.  If so, you also get to use those keys as arrows (when not
prefixed with "0").

I've presented [2] as a 2- rather than 3-way toggle (currently we have
hidden vs. displayed(links only) vs. displayed(links and form fields)).
I think it was a mistake, at the time, to separate the last two.  It was
an implementation oversight at the time that links-are-numbered was
first introduced, that form fields were *not* numbered.  It should
simply have been fixed by making them "first class links", i.e. changing
the links-are-numbered option to always include form fields.  I'd like
to see that change now.

=============================================================================

At this point in Lynx's development, I even wonder whether anyone still
needs "keypad-as-numbers" mode.  As an informal survey: who would
currently be bothered if the keypad *always* acted as arrows, except
when prefixed with "0" to make them into numbers?

I'm asking for first-hand bother, not referred.  i.e. please don't tell
me that this would confuse some nebulous population of blind users,
unless you yourself would be confused.  I would like to believe that the
blind users are just as smart as sighted users, and would "see" the
benefits of having an arrowpad *plus* go-to-link/page.

Remember, you would still have separate control over whether link
numbers were *displayed* on screen.

>Bela<