+1

I support this

>Its true mouseOverForKeyboardFocus isn't how "everyone else"
(whomever
>that may be :) does it and therefore feels unnatural to many
>experienced computer users, including me.. at first.  However
after
>tolerating Squeaks "weirdness" for a while, I soon appreciated
how
>simple, consistent, and efficient it is.
>
>mouseOver-for-focus can also be called "point-and-play".
That's how a
>novice can "learn to how to use Squeak".
>
>   INSTRUCTIONS FOR HOW TO USE SQUEAK
>       1) point the mouse to whatever object interests you
>       2) press a button or buttons (on either the mouse or
keyboard) 
>to
>manipulate the object
>
>That's it.  No exceptions.
>
>What "everyone else" wants is "clickForKeyboardFocus" meaning,
the only
>way to change focus, is to click somewhere.
>
>This creates ambiguity for what clicking does, sometimes it
manipulates
>the UI, sometimes it simply shifts keyboard focus (but only if
you're
>careful not to accidently click-activate the surrounding widgetry,
so
>the user is laboring just to switch focus).
>
>With mouseOver-for-focus, the hand indicates where focus is.
It's not
>always obvious with click-For-Focus, the user must remember
where he
>was or stop and ask himself, "where am I?" scanning the screen
for
>visual-signs (which vary by widget) of where focus is.  So here's
>another case where the user is laboring for the UI instead of
>vice-versa.
>
>Mouse-over-for-focus just plain gets more done for less
physical
>effort.  For example, to search a list, you could simply move the
>pointer over the list and start typing.  No Control or Alt modifier
>needed.  Click-for-focus cannot match that.
>
>Less mental effort, less physical effort.
>
>Whew, I could keep going but that's plenty enough isn't it?  Why
do I
>go through all this trouble to type this up advocating this
position?
>Because I care, and this position continues to need an advocate.
When
>it comes to basic operations like focus and text-editing, we are
>connected to Squeak at a lower level.  These operational
manipulations
>are __ingrained into our cerebellum__, so changing them from
one Squeak
>version requires cataclysmic biological reprogramming for some
of us. 
>Losing "selectionsMayShrink" in 3.9 was a casualty I will miss
dearly,
>and, sadly, a sign (to me) that Squeaks superior UI is slowly
eroding
>for no good reason (i.e., losing it didn't bring newbies to Squeak
in
>droves).  Thank goodness still for #mouseOverForKeyboardFocus
and I can
>still set #wordStyleCursorMovement off.
>
>I implore for 3.10 to be more conservative about removing these
sort of
>low-level operational details.  Both sides can have what mostly
what
>they want via preference settings, so we can all connect and
interact
>with Squeak in the way that is most natural to each individual..
>
>Thank you,
>  Chris