Community
Participate
Working Groups
I20070502-0010 On the old page, the user could type a key binding and immediately see all commands associated with the binding (e.g. that Alt+Shift+R is bound in two contexts). On the new page, you can only find the command if you sort by key binding, remember that it is written Alt+Shift+R (not Shift+Alt+R or something), and then do a manual binary search. Using the "Binding" field for finding associated commands would IMO not be a good idea in the new dialog, since it will cause inadvertent binding changes. I think the best way to solve the problem would be an additional filter field: - Fix bug 184731 - Split up the filter field into two filter fields and give them labels: Name: <filters by category and command> Binding: <filters by binding> - The Binding filter field should accept key sequences like the binding field at the bottom left. Changing the contents of either of the filter fields should clear the other filter.
you are correct ... although actually typing alt+j in the filter will find Alt+J and Shift+Alt+J it won't find Ctrl+Alt+J (you need to remember the key ordering) PW
(In reply to comment #1) Interesting -- but I doubt that people really try writing alt+shift+R by hand. Especially on the Mac, where it's really difficult to get the special characters of the modifier keys...
(In reply to comment #2) > (In reply to comment #1) > Interesting -- but I doubt that people really try writing alt+shift+R by hand. I agree. PW
The labels in front of the filter fields would also make the dialog much more accessible, since they would add mnemonics to the filter fields.
*** Bug 186205 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
This bug hasn't had any activity in quite some time. Maybe the problem got resolved, was a duplicate of something else, or became less pressing for some reason - or maybe it's still relevant but just hasn't been looked at yet. If you have further information on the current state of the bug, please add it. The information can be, for example, that the problem still occurs, that you still want the feature, that more information is needed, or that the bug is (for whatever reason) no longer relevant.
