home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!psinntp!execnet![jeff.zeitlin@execnet.com]
- From: "jeff zeitlin" <jeff.zeitlin@execnet.com>
- Newsgroups: comp.lang.pascal
- Subject: turbo vision keys?
- Message-ID: <1992Dec24.815.6870@execnet>
- Date: 24 Dec 92 02:57:53 EST
- Reply-To: "jeff zeitlin" <jeff.zeitlin@execnet.com>
- Distribution: comp
- Organization: Executive Networks Information
- Lines: 65
-
- GB::>>So why the heck are they not using ENTER for 'Next Field'?????
-
- CUA was designed to be standard across all platforms. Note the word
- "all." Many mainframe environments operate in what is called "block
- mode," where pressing ENTER (which is distinct from NewLine)
- transmits a whole screen of information from the terminal to the
- processor. I would assume that block mode was designed to utilize
- the processor more efficiently in such environments, but I don't
- know for sure.
-
- The PC, the Mac, and many other smaller-than-mainframe environments
- don't handle things this way, and hence don't need an ENTER key
- (what is called ENTER usually is interpreted as a 0x0D, 0x0A, or
- both) in the mainframe sense.
-
- GB::>I agree, I agree! Doesn't the problem lie with the standard? The point of
- ::>a standard is to have some sort of similar operation between software.
- ::>But if the standard is counter to what a lot of people think, it just
- ::>confuses the issue, and the standard should be changed.
-
- Except that the "intuitive" solution leads to a different problem:
- How do I signal the system that I have completed data entry, and
- wish to let the machine proceed with processing? I can't use ENTER
- (or NewLine, or RETURN, or NEXT - I've seen this key marked in all
- of these ways); I've designated that for moving from field to field.
- It doesn't make sense to use TAB. Not all machines have an END key,
- and those that do, it will probably be allocated as a text editing
- key. I can't count on having an ENTER/NewLine/etc. key on a numeric
- keypad that can be distinguished from the one on the main portion of
- the keyboard. I can't even count on having a numeric keypad. The
- SysReq key doesn't exist on all keyboards, and may not be easy to
- detect anyway (it is handled by a totally different interrupt from
- the rest of the keyboard on a MS-DOS PC). I have seen systems that
- don't have function keys. Using the Esc key is counterintuitive;
- normally, it means "cancel this operation; I screwed up." What's
- left? Using a "shifted" key? Shift-Enter/Ctrl-Enter/Alt-Enter? No
- way; the system may not support modification of process control
- keys, not to mention the possibility that the keyboard may not have
- an ALT key to start with.
-
- GB::>And who thought of this standard anyway? Was it Microsoft (insert your
- ::>appropriately unresponsive similar software company here), when they
- ::>introduced this absolutely stupid idea in Microsoft Windows, and then
- ::>told everyone else it was now a new standard? Or, are you telling me it wa
- ::>IBM who came up with this brilliant idea?
-
- Yes, it _WAS_ IBM, in fact. Because they wanted to have a
- consistent interface across all of their platforms - PC, AS/400,
- mainframes, System 3x, and anything else they might come up with in
- the future. Unfortunately, that meant designing for the lowest
- common denominator, which [BEGIN Bash_IBM_Mode] in IBM's case can be
- pretty low [END Bash_IBM_Mode].
-
- Actually, given what they set out to do, I think they did a pretty
- good job. Certainly better than I could do without a number of
- years of study devoted entirely to user interface design and
- ergonomics...
-
- J/
- jeff.zeitlin@execnet.com
- ---
- ■ QMPro 1.0 41-4533 ■ Never play Go and eat M&Ms at the same time...
- --
- Executive Network Information System (914) 667-4567
- International ILink Host
-