From: Melchior F. <mf...@ao...> - 2006-03-03 13:56:47
|
* Martin Spott -- Friday 03 March 2006 11:59: > Ah, you actually _did_ understand ? It didn't look like that. So why > then do you prefer being ignorant ? No, that's a misunderstanding. Let me clear it up: 1) we were not discussing a new keyboard layout 2) we were not discussing what binding should be on the n/N key 3) we were not discussing on which key propeller-pitch should be 4) and least of all were we discussing where to put bindings for not yet implemented functions propeller-pitch *is* already on n/N for 5 aircraft[1] (which is a lot if you ask me), and used by another 12 aircraft in cvs[2]. The discussion was not about *changing* the key binding, but only about making it global. I didn't ignore your order, but I consider it unreasonable at this point. You seem to have decided for yourself already, that n/N must be *changed*(!) to "carburetor heat" *now*, because changing it later would be bad!? Let's wait until we need a carburetor heat binding. Maybe we have redesigned the whole keyboard layout a few times until then, after all that's suggested at least twice every year -- mostly by people who haven't moved a finger for the keyboard layout before and after that. m. [1] c182, c310, hurricaneIIb, seafireIIIc, spitfireIIa [2] Aerostar-700, Boeing314, Citation, Lockheed1049, TU-114, b1900d, b29, beech99, dc3, dhc2, p51d, pa24-250 |