[dwm] default keybindings suggestion (for the new multiviewing behaviour)

From: Sander van Dijk <a.h.vandijk_AT_gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2006 20:33:03 +0200


dwm's new (hg tip) multi tag viewing is simply awesome, but currently
only possible with the mouse. I think this feature is a stayer, and
thus should have some default keybindings too. I generally find it
_very_ important that some thought goes into the logic of keybindings
(i.e. which modifiers to use for what type of actions), since that
makes them a lot easier to remember and more comfortable to use (wmii
had some evolutionary grown default bindings for a while, which sucked
plenty). In fact, default bindings are probably the single most
important thing in the first impression I get of a wm, so they better
be good :-).

Here's my suggestion:
Right now, the 'selection' bindings use the MODKEY prefix; Since these
are often performed operations, I believe is should stay this way
(i.e. MODKEY-[0...n] for view selecting must stay).
There are currently two bindings for applying tags to a client:
MODKEY-Shift-[0...n] replaces the clients tags with a new one, and
MODKEY-Control-[0...n] adds the new one to the clients tags. I think
that generally the MODKEY-Shift-[0...n] binding is used most, so it
should stay; this lead me to the following bindings:

MODKEY-[0...n] -> select only tag [0...n] for viewing
MODKEY-Control-[0...n] -> add tag [0...n] to the current view

MODKEY-Shift-[0...n] -> apply only tag [0...n] to client
MODKEY-Shift-Control-[0...n] -> add tag [0...n] to client

This seems nicely consistent to me: bindings without Shift are for
viewing, bindings with Shift for applying tags; bindings without
Control are for single tag operations, bindings with Control are for
multi tag operations. Nice and simple.

Also, I think that the view prev/next actions have become obsolete now
dwm has multiviewing (when tag 1 and 3 are being viewed, what is the
next / previous tag?) Hence I opt for the removal of MODKEY-[hl] (even
though I must admit I liked those, but I think that losing them sucks
a lot less than the unpredictability the will cause when they stay).

Greetings, Sander.
Received on Fri Aug 11 2006 - 20:33:06 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Sun Jul 13 2008 - 14:30:06 UTC