Hello,
Drew Adams <drew.ad...@oracle.com> writes:
>> > Dunno whether there are actual bindings in Org that correspond to these
>> > occurrences in the source code of `C-c' followed by a letter. Might be
>> > worth checking. (Bindings of `C-c' followed by a letter are reserved
>> > for users.) Possibly these are just vestigial doc indications, which
>> > could be corrected/updated.
>>
>> Org's manual suggests to bind `org-agenda' to `C-c a', but doesn't bind
>> it by default.
>
> I'm not even sure that's a great idea. I think not.
>
> I suppose it's "legit", as the user, not the Org code, would be
> making the binding. But in my libraries I provide binding
> suggestions only for keys that are not reserved for use by users.
>
> If a commonly used Emacs library (Org is the best example of that)
> suggests to users that they bind `C-c a' to something then that
> key becomes pretty much, in effect, lost as a key reserved for
> user customization.
>
> IOW, if 90% of Emacs users follow that suggestion then there is
> little difference between that situation and the situation of
> Org binding `C-c a' by default.
>
> My vote would be that Org should not do this. Just one opinion.
I understand your concern. However, Org tries to be as neutral as
possible with this. Quoting the manual:
The manual suggests a few global key bindings, in particular @kbd{C-c a} for
@code{org-agenda} and @kbd{C-c c} for @code{org-capture}. These are only
suggestions, but the rest of the manual assumes that these key bindings are
in
place in order to list commands by key access.
As explained here, this "suggestion" is only necessary to clarify key
bindings in the manual. `org-agenda' and `org-capture' bindings are
really prefixes for many other commands. Having to write, e.g., "the
prefix you chose for `org-agenda' then #" instead of "C-c a #" would be
a lot more verbose, and ultimately, cripple documentation.
I think the current state is quite fair.
Regards,
--
Nicolas Goaziou 0x80A93738
