Bug 29932

Summary: Clean up and update Lithuanian keyboard layouts
Product: xkeyboard-config Reporter: Rimas Kudelis <rq>
Component: GeneralAssignee: xkb
Status: RESOLVED FIXED QA Contact:
Severity: normal    
Priority: medium    
Version: unspecified   
Hardware: All   
OS: All   
Whiteboard:
i915 platform: i915 features:
Attachments: Output of git diff -w (for reference only, no whitespace changes)
git diff (patch with whitespace changes, please commit this one)

Description Rimas Kudelis 2010-09-01 04:25:38 UTC
Created attachment 38353 [details]
Output of git diff -w (for reference only, no whitespace changes)

I cleaned up symbols/lt and made a few changes to most of the layouts. I'd like to see this commited. Detailed explanation of what I did follows.

The cleanup I did:
* moved/changed the comments here and there, so that they're similar for all keymaps
* aligned all layout descriptions to actually have nice columns
* also replaced tabs with spaces
* moved around definitions of certain keys to order them by actual order on keyboard
* moved includes to the top of each layout.
* replaced definitions of certain keys with includes

The changes:
* replaced definitions of certain keys with includes
* added endash to the 3rd level of the <AE11> in lt, lt(us), and lt(ibm)
* added acute to the 3rd level of <TLDE> in lt, lt(us), and lt(ibm)
* added include "eurosign(e)" to lt

I discussed the changes on local linux users mailing list, and got positive feedback about them.
Comment 1 Rimas Kudelis 2010-09-01 04:26:50 UTC
Created attachment 38354 [details] [review]
git diff (patch with whitespace changes, please commit this one)
Comment 2 Rimas Kudelis 2010-09-01 04:57:16 UTC
I still have two concerns though:
1) I would actually be willing to remove lt(ibm) at all. The standard it implements was made deprecated by lt(std) 10 years ago, so I doubt that layout has many users. On the other hand, our implementation seems to be mure advanced than the standard, and actually is usable, so it's possible that it has a few users who would miss it.

2) if I get it right, nbsp(level3) should add no-break space to both 3rd and 4th levels. But in effect, at least when toggling appropriate radio buttons in Gnome, both of these options only echo non-breaking space in the third level. I think this is a bug, in nbsp(level3), right?
Comment 3 Sergey V. Udaltsov 2010-09-01 14:04:56 UTC
Thanks, committed

Use of freedesktop.org services, including Bugzilla, is subject to our Code of Conduct. How we collect and use information is described in our Privacy Policy.