Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> Why? I do not like using a gui name to look up a function. lfun+arg >> looks better to me. > > lfun+arg might be very long, especially if the action is a command > sequence. And the name is defined already in the menu description file > (stmenu.inc). I just propose to reuse that. Then 'stdmenu.inc' would > just have to enumerate the names it wants.
But the same name could apply to two different entries (this is just GUI, after all). The lfun+arg looks like a better key. I do not disagree about having this entry, but having it be the identifier. > Because it seems logical to me. It does not make sense IMHO to define > everything related to an action in this file except for its shortcut. > So all of cua.bind should IMHO be merged into this new file. We can > even define multiple shortcuts for the different platforms if need be. We do not describe in which menu entry it is. We do not describe in which toolbar it is. So why describe to which key it is attached? (besides the fact that qt does it)? JMarc
