Does this have any advantage over the system-provided combination of control-command-D (which works with or without a selection).
One thing I don't like about the pop-up is that it appears for whatever word your mouse is hovering over. This command can work with a selection or caret placement. Which means for keyboard junkies, they can skip one more trip to the mouse.
The only other advantage is that you might prefer using the app to the pop-up.
Oliver Taylor wrote:
Does this have any advantage over the system-provided combination of control-command-D (which works with or without a selection).
One thing I don't like about the pop-up is that it appears for whatever word your mouse is hovering over. This command can work with a selection or caret placement. Which means for keyboard junkies, they can skip one more trip to the mouse.
The only other advantage is that you might prefer using the app to the pop-up.
I'm actually planning to make some sort of "Writing" bundle, with various commands helpful when writing prose. So far on the list of things I want to do:
1. A dictionary command that pops up a TM yellow tooltip of a definition when a shortcut is pressed.
2. A word completion command that allows a user to complete the current word with a menu of possible completions, hopefully including words added to the custom spelling dictionary, as well as any words in the current document.
3. A thesaurus command, that uses WordNet to show a menu with synonyms for the current word, in groups for each sense of the word, and possibly with some synonyms in submenus if there are too many senses, or too many synonyms within a sense.
4. A spell-check command, that either somehow uses the built-in spell-check, or pulls up suggestions from some other tool (aspell perhaps).
5. Some commands for getting better statistics than the current document statistics count. It would be nice to have a word count which knows how to ignore stuff in html/latex/markdown tags, etc. etc. (or maybe bundles can provide overrides to this command, and all call out to a single script), but it would also be nice to be able to get some readability statistics, such as counts of average word length, average sentence length, and maybe metrics like Flesch-Kincaid, etc.
6. It might even be nice to add some tools for checking grammar (flagging things like wordy sentences, etc.). There are some decent open-source programs for this, I believe.
7. We could have some commands for looking the current word/selection up in various online references. Immediately obvious choices are websters, wikipedia, and a generic google search, but it would be nice to allow people to add their own (I have access to the Oxford English Dictionary through school, for example)
8. Eventually it would maybe even be nice to have some translation facilities, etc.
Anyway, many of these things require some external program in order to function, so I was thinking we probably want to make universal builds of a bunch of these, and then give users a single download to install them all in a package.
I think with not too much work we can take John Gruber's [challenge][df], and toss it back at him ;). Can I get a hallelujah?
-Jacob
[df]: http://daringfireball.net/2006/10/hallelujah_autocompletion
Jacob Rus wrote:
- A spell-check command, that either somehow uses the built-in
spell-check, or pulls up suggestions from some other tool (aspell perhaps).
Apparently this is possible with ⌥F2. I'm not sure this is my favorite shortcut for this, or that the system spell checker is necessarily all that I want it to be, but this is probably sufficient for now.
- We could have some commands for looking the current word/selection up
in various online references. Immediately obvious choices are websters, wikipedia, and a generic google search, but it would be nice to allow people to add their own (I have access to the Oxford English Dictionary through school, for example)
Okay, I guess the web searches bundle already does this. Well, maybe we should get a keyboard shortcut that exists on Mac laptops then. Also, I was thinking a bit of putting up a tooltip with the first paragraph or so, instead of necessarily going to the page.
-Jacob
On Nov 7, 2006, at 3:56 AM, Jacob Rus wrote:
Well, maybe we should get a keyboard shortcut that exists on Mac laptops then.
Both option F2 and the help key are problematic on Mac laptops. :(
James Edward Gray II
James Edward Gray II wrote:
On Nov 7, 2006, at 3:56 AM, Jacob Rus wrote:
Well, maybe we should get a keyboard shortcut that exists on Mac laptops then.
Both option F2 and the help key are problematic on Mac laptops. :(
The former is just fine. Either add Fn to that, or switch the preference in the keyboard preferences. The latter is a pain. Allan: maybe we could have some sort of workaround so that full-size keyboards could still use the help/insert key, but laptops could use some alternate keystroke. Given that this is the only key on a desktop keyboard which cannot be imitated on an apple laptop (!), I think a hard-coded workaround would be somewhat justified. It's too useful a key to deny to desktop users, but leaving commands that use it desktop-only is also a shame.
-Jacob
On Nov 7, 2006, at 9:37 AM, Jacob Rus wrote:
James Edward Gray II wrote:
On Nov 7, 2006, at 3:56 AM, Jacob Rus wrote:
Well, maybe we should get a keyboard shortcut that exists on Mac laptops then.
Both option F2 and the help key are problematic on Mac laptops. :(
The former is just fine. Either add Fn to that, or switch the preference in the keyboard preferences.
Pressing fn-ctrl-F2 does not bring up TM's context menu on my Macbook Pro.
James Edward Gray II
The former is just fine. Either add Fn to that, or switch the preference in the keyboard preferences.
Pressing fn-ctrl-F2 does not bring up TM's context menu on my Macbook Pro.
I think you meant fn-option-F2 ... but you should try option-fn-F2 (seriously :-) .. the order which you press the keys in the combo seems to matter when using fn to toggle the FKeys
-steve
Just go into system pref > keyboard & mice > keyboard and turn on "Use F1-F12 keys to control software features" Which should let option-F2 or any other F2 work nicely in TM. You'll have to use fn-F2 if you want to adjust the brightness or what not. Which is a nice trade off to make, for me at least.
William
On Nov 7, 2006, at 11:01 AM, Steve Lianoglou wrote:
The former is just fine. Either add Fn to that, or switch the preference in the keyboard preferences.
Pressing fn-ctrl-F2 does not bring up TM's context menu on my Macbook Pro.
I think you meant fn-option-F2 ... but you should try option-fn-F2 (seriously :-) .. the order which you press the keys in the combo seems to matter when using fn to toggle the FKeys
-steve
For new threads USE THIS: textmate@lists.macromates.com (threading gets destroyed and the universe will collapse if you don't) http://lists.macromates.com/mailman/listinfo/textmate
On Nov 7, 2006, at 10:01 AM, Steve Lianoglou wrote:
The former is just fine. Either add Fn to that, or switch the preference in the keyboard preferences.
Pressing fn-ctrl-F2 does not bring up TM's context menu on my Macbook Pro.
I think you meant fn-option-F2 ... but you should try option-fn-F2 (seriously :-) .. the order which you press the keys in the combo seems to matter when using fn to toggle the FKeys
Got it. Thanks much!
James Edward Gray II
On Nov 7, 2006, at 9:25 AM, James Edward Gray II wrote:
On Nov 7, 2006, at 10:01 AM, Steve Lianoglou wrote:
The former is just fine. Either add Fn to that, or switch the preference in the keyboard preferences.
Pressing fn-ctrl-F2 does not bring up TM's context menu on my Macbook Pro.
I think you meant fn-option-F2 ... but you should try option-fn-F2 (seriously :-) .. the order which you press the keys in the combo seems to matter when using fn to toggle the FKeys
Got it. Thanks much!
James Edward Gray II
I find it useful to go into the Keyboard & Mouse system preference and check "use the F1-F12 keys to control software features." Then you don't have to worry about hitting fn so much.
Bill
- Some commands for getting better statistics than the current
document statistics count. It would be nice to have a word count which knows how to ignore stuff in html/latex/markdown tags, etc. etc. (or maybe bundles can provide overrides to this command, and all call out to a single script), but it would also be nice to be able to get some readability statistics, such as counts of average word length, average sentence length, and maybe metrics like Flesch- Kincaid, etc.
- It might even be nice to add some tools for checking grammar
(flagging things like wordy sentences, etc.). There are some decent open-source programs for this, I believe.
Jacob, you might have a look at diction, a descendant of the Writer's Workbench:
http://directory.fsf.org/GNU/diction.html
The `style` command gives a number of metrics including Flesch- Kincaid and `diction` checks for grammar (although it perpetuates some of the unfortunate aspects of Strunk and White's prescriptions--- useful nonetheless).
As for filtering LaTeX commands, I run the generated pdf through ps2ascii before running these. Won't work for html documents, but you could run them through a text browser like lynx or links with the dump option instead.
All the best, Mark
Mark Eli Kalderon wrote:
- Some commands for getting better statistics than the current
document statistics count. It would be nice to have a word count which knows how to ignore stuff in html/latex/markdown tags, etc. etc. (or maybe bundles can provide overrides to this command, and all call out to a single script), but it would also be nice to be able to get some readability statistics, such as counts of average word length, average sentence length, and maybe metrics like Flesch-Kincaid, etc.
- It might even be nice to add some tools for checking grammar
(flagging things like wordy sentences, etc.). There are some decent open-source programs for this, I believe.
Jacob, you might have a look at diction, a descendant of the Writer's Workbench:
Yes indeed, I was looking at that page when I wrote the post :). When I actually have some time to make this thing, I think I will indeed use style/diction.
and `diction` checks for grammar (although it perpetuates some of the unfortunate aspects of Strunk and White's prescriptions--- useful nonetheless).
I didn't look at exactly what it did, but I assume it can't be worse than MS Office's grammar check.
As for filtering LaTeX commands, I run the generated pdf through ps2ascii before running these. Won't work for html documents, but you could run them through a text browser like lynx or links with the dump option instead.
Well, I'm still thinking about the best way to get things to work for multiple document types. It has to do a few things: a) strip out extraneous junk, and b) figure out how to get back to the specific places in the document where there are points of interest.
On Nov 16, 2006, at 5:55 AM, Jacob Rus wrote:
Mark Eli Kalderon wrote:
- Some commands for getting better statistics than the current
document statistics count. It would be nice to have a word count which knows how to ignore stuff in html/latex/markdown tags, etc. etc. (or maybe bundles can provide overrides to this command, and all call out to a single script), but it would also be nice to be able to get some readability statistics, such as counts of average word length, average sentence length, and maybe metrics like Flesch-Kincaid, etc. 6. It might even be nice to add some tools for checking grammar (flagging things like wordy sentences, etc.). There are some decent open-source programs for this, I believe.
Jacob, you might have a look at diction, a descendant of the Writer's Workbench: http://directory.fsf.org/GNU/diction.html
Yes indeed, I was looking at that page when I wrote the post :). When I actually have some time to make this thing, I think I will indeed use style/diction.
and `diction` checks for grammar (although it perpetuates some of the unfortunate aspects of Strunk and White's prescriptions--- useful nonetheless).
I didn't look at exactly what it did, but I assume it can't be worse than MS Office's grammar check.
As for filtering LaTeX commands, I run the generated pdf through ps2ascii before running these. Won't work for html documents, but you could run them through a text browser like lynx or links with the dump option instead.
Well, I'm still thinking about the best way to get things to work for multiple document types. It has to do a few things: a) strip out extraneous junk, and b) figure out how to get back to the specific places in the document where there are points of interest.
As a Latex user, I would like to encourage this bundle development. Diction, as it is, gets tripped up on all the math output.
Jenny
-
Bill Dolinar -
Jacob Rus -
James Edward Gray II -
Jenny Harrison -
Mark Eli Kalderon -
Oliver Taylor -
Reprisal -
Steve Lianoglou