GNU bug report logs - #70413
30.0.50; FR: skip inactive widgets when tabbing

Previous Next

Full log

Message #23 received at 70413 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Stephen Berman <stephen.berman <at> gmx.net>
Cc: 70413 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#70413: 30.0.50; FR: skip inactive widgets when tabbing
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2024 18:42:49 +0300

> From: Stephen Berman <stephen.berman <at> gmx.net>
> Cc: 70413 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2024 15:57:56 +0200
> 
> On Wed, 17 Apr 2024 15:04:34 +0300 Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> wrote:
> 
> >> +@defopt widget-skip-inactive
> >> +If non-@code{nil}, navigating between widgets by @kbd{M-@key{TAB}}
> >                                                     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> 
> Oops, that was copy-pasta; thanks for catching it.
> 
> > This should probably be @kbd{key{TAB}}.
> 
> Or rather @key{TAB}, right?  That's what's used earlier in the Widget
> manual and IIUC is what (info "(texinfo) @key") recommends.

No, @kbd{@key{TAB}} is correct when you are talking about user typing
something (as opposed to talking about the key TAB).

Texinfo explicitly tells you that @key is for naming a key, not for
describing user input.

>   If non-@code{nil}, skip over inactive widgets when using @key{TAB}
>   (@code{widget-forward}) or @kbd{S-@key{TAB}} (@code{widget-backward},
>   also bound to @kbd{M-@key{TAB}}) to navigate between widgets.
> 
> Is this formulation acceptable?

Yes, thanks.

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.