'Emacs style' delete line shortcut (CTRL/U) doesn't work correctly in Firefox

[Gene Heskett]

On Friday 12 October 2018 11:49:21 Peter Flynn wrote:

> On 12/10/18 14:53, Liam Proven wrote:[...]
>
> > In work up to the late 1990s... let me think...
>
> [snip]
>
> I probably bumped into some of those but I managed to discover UNIX
> and then Linux early enough to be able to dictate my own work-pattern.
>
> > WordPerfect Corp could probably make a decent fist of it, if they
> > tried.
>
> Actually they did. WP8 came with a fully-fledged XML editor using an
> XML-based stylesheet mechanism. It worked well, but by then the XML
> people at WP were fleeing for other (corporate/management) reasons.

And I have a legal, all accounted and paid for ($99.90+tax) copy of WP8 
in a box with all dox, about 3.5" thick on a shelf above me. It very 
clearly, in blue plain text letters about 1" high, says FOR LINUX on the 
box. But what it didn't say was that it was for Corels version of linux, 
a costly abomination I had no intentions of trying to install. And guess 
what, its loaded with corel linux dependencies on stuff that Red Hat 5.1 
had already left behind in the late '90's. I've long since given up ever 
trying to use it on a decent linux so I still do not know what it looks 
like or how it runs.

Corel has of course vanished, cutting their own throat, but somebody at 
Corel owes me the hundred bucks I paid for it, plus interest over the 
last nearly 20 years.  One of the life lessons I've learned at the hands 
of someone too much like the old the M$.

> > Ahhhh... I never tried on an existing file, or a new blank file. I
> > just used the buffers there when I opened it to experiment.
>
> Yes, it's not a very impressive start-up. Better than it used to be,
> though :-(
>
> > Interesting. I don't use _editor_ macros for that. In the old days,
> > I wrote a bit of QuickBASIC or maybe a shell script.
>
> I think this is why MSMcQ was so insistent in his description that if
> you want macros, an editor should run a known, recognised programming
> language to write them in, not some concoction of the authors' liking.
>
> > Fair point. The rise of languages with embeddable pre-existing
> > controls has helped that a lot, in my world.
>
> Yes, I see a lot of TinyMCE, although it's not always that
> configurable in context.
>
> > Hmmm. Good point. Historical tradition and ego... :-(
>
> Ego has a lot to do with it. Not that I'm decrying what RMS has done —
> far from it, as he has had an uphill battle to fight.
>
> > I think at the level of casual non-techies, using Macs or Windows,
> > it's mostly all one now.
>
> Yes, it's all basic point and click, and no knowledge needed (exc ept
> for how to point and click :-)
>
> The BIG missing bit in Linux is multimedia support: there are still
> too many formats out there which will get you the grey rectangle and
> "This format is not supported". Flash is obviously the worst offender
> by a long way.
>
> > And the real casual users are moving to tablets and phones, anyway.
> > PCs are becoming arcane.
>
> I no longer take my laptop away on a trip. My large phone and BT
> keyboard work perfectly with a plaintext editor and a command window.
>
> > This is one place ChromeOS is strong. Stronger than almost anyone's
> > noticed. It's a clever play by Google.
>
> Never used it. If I can't run Emacs, Saxon (Java), and LaTeX it's not
> interesting.
>
> > We have truly lost *so* much, it makes me almost weep.
>
> Perhaps we can take this to a private thread: I am writing a paper for
> next year's Markup UK on 'Software we have lost' and I'd appreciate
> knowing what other people rate as 'lost'.
>
> > Here's a wonderful ½hr 2013 presentation *pretending* to from 1973,
> > about what _should_ have been the next 40 years. Watch it, laugh,
> > and then mourn.
>
> I'm missing the link to that.
>
> ///Peter



-- 
Cheers, Gene Heskett
--
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>