Sorry I don't have time to help more, but I think the best route to
getting one in the image is for someone to understand the point of all
the different packages (what problems it solves, which it doesn't, what
needs to be done before it can be integrated) and then write a report to
the list as a basis for further work/decisions.

Daniel

Stephane Ducasse <ducasse at iam.unibe.ch> wrote:
> I like the idea. For me I would love to see the best one in the image.
> So how to we proceed. I was planning to have a look at the package of 
> Steven (when find
> some times for fun stuff)
> 
> Stef
> 
> 
> On Thursday, August 21, 2003, at 02:11 PM, Bijan Parsia wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, 20 Aug 2003, Stephane Ducasse wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Steven
> >>
> >> I was about to bring from the graveyard my implementation to get
> >> paragraphEditor
> >> handling multiple key binding table. So that on a per-instance based 
> >> we
> >> could have different bindings.
> >
> > Neat.
> >
> >> Do you think that this is worth? or should I use your Keymapper?
> >> I would really to have that kind of simple functionality in the image.
> >> Is keymapper fixing paragraph editor? Because my changes were small
> >> (introducing the right instance and class var in paragraph editor,
> >> fixing all the methods to use the instance var) and adding a Binding
> >> class.
> > [snip]
> >
> > I think that with yours, we have 4 different packages (perhaps more, 
> > maybe
> > it's only three) floating around offering this sort of functionality. I
> > started examininga couple (Hooker? And Multiple Shortcuts?). 
> > Reconciling
> > these (or just picking the best, where "best" is partially determined 
> > by
> > "having active maintatiner" :)) would be good.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Bijan Parsia.
> >
> >