4 ms·
Surfingkeys looks pretty similar (though I have yet to try it); I'm just describing the experience poorly. You press f, little labels show up on the links (I ca
by accoil 4y ago
Surfingkeys looks pretty similar (though I have yet to try it); I'm just describing the experience poorly. You press f, little labels show up on the links (I called this "listing the links"), and you then press the keys on the label (the "select from" part). Probably me using the open in new tab command F (as opposed to open in current tab command f) did not help.
Not saying it's a bad experience. I find it's quite nice if I'm currently looking at the correct link so I can get the letters from the label easily.
It's just a different paradigm. If I didn't know what a link was, I wouldn't know that I could press f to open the link selection. This means I can't select a link unless I had a "select unknown" button, and then use that to inspect it.
Select unknown can be done with the keyboard: Emacs' embark[^1] is a good example of it. You use search/arrows to go to an interesting piece of text (e.g something underlined), run embark, and it lists all the potential things you can do with it (e.g open in external browser, or download an archived copy). It's just that keyboard UIs do not tend to be geared around it.
That though is the sort of thing the mouse is good at: you see something interesting, you prod it to see what you can do with it.
Say you saw a phrase you didn't understand in the browser. Currently, with a mouse you'd highlight it, right click, and then select the search with search engine option. With keyboard you'd open the search engine, and enter the phrase. Both get you to the same place.
Now if we extend the mouse to have a "I would like to know idioms better" option. You could just select the phrase, right click, and a definition could be there waiting for you next to the context menu. It could even be there on hover.
With the keyboard though, you'd generally run an "I would like to know idioms better" command. This would then ask you which idiom on the page would you like to understand. You then select it, and presto. A faster version could potentially have idiom meanings show up the moment you ran the command by a similar hover effect (or just listing all discovered idioms in a popup etc).
One of the differences here though is that from the mouse you still have a list of actions on the text open, so maybe if you liked the definition you could then copy the phrase.
This certainly could be done from the keyboard UI: just have it list other applicable commands that could be run on the selection generated from the command that searched for phrases. No reason why it could not then spawn something asking if you wanted to "(c)opy, c(u)t" etc like the context menu.
But that is only visible because there was a phrase you didn't know. If you didn't know that there was a command to define phrases, you wouldn't have found out. In theory you could have commands register everything they could act on, and then have another command let the user select an interactive thing, and list the commands that registered for it. I think that would be overwhelming though, as something like a dictionary command would register for every word.
Ultimately the mouse is just different then the keyboard, and I think that there is interesting potential in having a tool that can interrogate arbitrary things on your screen.
[1]: https://github.com/oantolin/embark https://github.com/oantolin/embark
- crabbone 4y ago> You press f, little labels show up on the links Yeah, that's how Surfingkeys works too more or less. What you are saying is that you need to learn to use this interface in order to be efficient with it -- this is pretty much the story of any human activity, any tool ever. Whatever you learn how to do, you get simplified tasks and more forgiving tools. It's very rare that you'd keep the same tool and the same approach if you keep specializing in something. So, I don't see it as a problem. Yes, you need to learn, yes, because knowing how to do something more efficiently is worthwhile?.. > Currently, with a mouse you'd highlight it, right click, and then select the search with search engine option. With keyboard you'd open the search engine, and enter the phrase. Both get you to the same place. Nope. That's not even close to how it works. With Surfingkeys, when I look at a phrase / word that I want to look up in a search engine, I can do this: 1. Press "v", and do the Jedi-jump style navigation to select the beginning or end of the text I'm interested in (i.e. it will take another 1-3 key presses). 2. Press "v" again to enter visual selection mode (similar to Vi's). 3. Use Vi's navigation commands to select the text of interest (again, another 2-3 key-presses). 4. Press "o" to search in default search engine (but there are also bindings for other engines, or I could select them by name w/ auto-complete. Or, I could press "y" to copy selected text and paste it elsewhere (also outside of the browser). Or, I could press "t" and paste it into Google Translate text box in a new tab etc. This also works for all kinds of "unselectable" texts (eg. in GMail, the email title is not normally selectable with the mouse because instead it will try to open it). With Surfingkeys I can select the title of an email w/o opening it in GMail. Another benefit is precision. I don't need to pay a lot of attention to the mouse pointer's position. If I know what text I want to select, I can do it with my eyes closed, or, more likely, looking at a different place on the screen which may require my attention at that time. Not that useful with selection, but is very useful with search / when I need to fill a bunch of forms, and I need to look at the original when searching for the corresponding text in my copy. > It could even be there on hover. With Surfingkeys you hover by pressing C-h. See the steps above for how to focus the element of interest, and then by pressing C-h you'd invoke the mouseover event. This also beats mouse interaction for elements that are hidden or partially hidden by other elements on the page due to bad / broken layout.
- accoil 4y ago