Preliminary OLPC xkb definitions

[Daniel Stone]

On Mon, Jun 11, 2007 at 06:36:16AM -0400, Bernardo Innocenti wrote:
> -	<AB11> = 211;	// backslash/underscore
> +	// FIXME: conflicts with OLPC definition
> +	//<AB11> = 211;	// backslash/underscore

Sounds like a broken keyboard or kernel map to me.  But, regardless, why
not make keycodes/olpc if you really need to, and have model olpc
include that?

> +partial alphanumeric_keys
> +xkb_symbols "olpc" {

Can you quickly enumerate the differences between this and a standard
Brazilian keyboard?

> +partial alphanumeric_keys
> +xkb_symbols "olpc" {
> +
> +    include "us(basic)"
> +
> +    Name[Group1] = "Argentina - OLPC";

Likewise.

> +partial alphanumeric_keys 
> +xkb_symbols "olpc" {
> +
> +    name[Group1]="Nigerian - OLPC";
> +
> +    include "ng(basic)"
> +};

... this is obviously utterly unnecessary.  If you have a list of set
layouts you need to mangle (model olpc + layout foo -> symbols
foo(olpc)), use a model group in the rules file to only change certain
layouts.

> --- symbols/pc	2 Jan 2007 20:56:55 -0000	1.7
> +++ symbols/pc	11 Jun 2007 10:25:04 -0000
> @@ -143,3 +143,37 @@ xkb_symbols "editing" {
>      key <RGHT> {	[  Right		]	};
>  };
>  
> +// definition for the OLPC keyboards
> +alphanumeric_keys
> +xkb_symbols "olpc" {

This should probably be symbols/olpc, but Sergey can feel free to
correct me on this one.

> +    key <AK01> { [ A1  ] };

This sounds like a really bad set of keysym names.

> +    name[Group1]= "Thailand - OLPC";
> +    // The OLPC thai layout
> +    // walter at laptop.org
> +
> +    key <TLDE> { [ 0x1000E4F,  0x1000E5B ] };

Do we not have X keysyms for all the Thai glyphs?

> +    key <AB11> { [ ISO_Next_Group, ISO_Prev_Group ] };

This belongs in the generic OLPC set, not in the Thai layout.

> +    // It's a little different from the usual international layout.

How so?  (Explaining what the keys on the third and fourth levels of the
top row are would be good: I don't have an exact Unicode map in my
head.)

> +    key <AB11>	{ [  multiply,   division, ISO_Next_Group, ISO_Prev_Group ] };
> +    include "level3(ralt_switch)"
> +};
> +
> +partial alphanumeric_keys
> +xkb_symbols "olpc2" {
> +    include "us(olpc)"
> +    key <AB11>	{ [ ISO_Next_Group, ISO_Prev_Group ] };
> +};

So the only purpose of this second layout is to get rid of
multiply/divide?

The whole patchset looks pretty sketchy to me.  And I'm assuming it
depends on some rules changes and also keysym additions which aren't
published.

Cheers,
Daniel
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg/attachments/20070611/8899f387/attachment.pgp>