Some weeks ago there was a proposal for a search field for the shortcuts pane inside the Preferences. Now some more remarks:
One more remark/question:
I try to avoid any change of the shortcuts, but at least on Mac some shortcuts are erratic, e.g.
^ + = – Change case
^ + ] – Adjust end punctuation
At least with a German layout, this is cumbersome. I know where the "=" (Shift + Zero) and the "]" (Alt + 6) are, but in the first case it works only from time to time (isn't Shift - F3 the standard shortcut for this command?) and the second not at all, I assume because the "]" on the English layout is somewhere else.
Isn't there a function to "mask" the shortcuts' key in the shortcuts pane so that the real key on the machine is being displayed, not only the key for the English layout. I assume that Hans(ens) and Igor are working with the English layout, so they do not have this problem.
1. The text in those buttons to enter shortcuts is the same as the names of the corresponding menu items. Indeed, for a few names it might be more intuitive to make the text more descriptive or add a tool tip.
2. I don't think the default shortcuts have been changed in this year CT updates - with one exception (CTRL + ENTER) to add segment to memory and go to the next untranslated segment.
3. I can see the fields for 3 keys in your screenshot.
2. Okay, I was quite sure I did not change them after my last reinstall, but I could be wrong.
3. Uh, I meant extra keys, e.g. Shift + Ctrl + Cmd + =. But as in 2, I might be wrong here.
1. Oh yes, the wording is the same, but in the shortcuts pane it lacks context (submenu of "Find at cursor" and search bar) and maybe it is better to have them grouped in the shortcuts pane for all the other people who do change most or many of their shortcuts, eg. because they prefer the shortcuts from their last tool.
> At least with a German layout, this is cumbersome. I know where the "=" (Shift + Zero) and the "]" (Alt + 6) are...
CT has no way of knowing which keyboard layout is being used so it relies on the standard layout. I don't think that Java is aware of any changes to the layout. I wonder if Mac native programs reflect such keyboard layout changes when displaying keyboard shortcuts.
> 3. Uh, I meant extra keys, e.g. Shift + Ctrl + Cmd + =. But as in 2, I might be wrong here.
No, it has never been like above. It is a bit awkward to have 4 keys for a keyboard shortcut.
> It is a bit awkward to have 4 keys for a keyboard shortcut.
Sure, but it would open far more possibilities to assign the more complicated shortcuts to the tasks that are really seldomly used. I have no problem of holding Cmd-Alt-Ctrl or Shift-Alt-Ctrl (resp. Win instead of Cmd for conventional machines) with one hand and type the other key (letter or number) with the other one.
Indeed, I see the point.
> I wonder if Mac native programs reflect such keyboard layout changes when displaying keyboard shortcuts.
I assume most companies do not have apps with so much keyboard shortcuts, or this kind of remapping is easier done with native apps. I assumed that Java is able to recognize the layout (see also here and here). On the orher hand side, a limit of the default shortcuts to letters, numbers and F keys would not be helpful, I think.
When I quickly browse through the menus of all the programs on each OS, the keyboard shortcuts are assigned only for the frequent actions. Just use the mouse for the rare ones. However, it boils down to certain modern UI trends in general. For example, look for the evolution of web browsers where the menus are hidden or disappearing at all. Look how simple and intuitive their interfaces have become if you compare it to their versions from years ago with tens of menu items. In fact, just a few buttons and an address field is usually displayed there. See the pure simplicity of some web interfaces of both desktop and mobile (iOS and Android) apps - Google Translate, DeepL, for example. It is a bit hard to achieve the same with a multi-feature program. That's why I would love to see the requests aiming at a clearer interface, and not the other way around.
The shortcuts do not have anything to do with an uncleaner UI, in the opposite, they (can) replace many menu commands. The more shortcuts you have, the easier it is to implement a lean menu such as for Chrome. Without working shortcuts (ie. working from the beginning, w/o tweaking because you have the wrong keyboard layout) you need to use the menu, at least until changing the shortcut.
Most complex programs nowadays have ribbons, and it is nice that CT does not need one. But I would not go so far and try to achieve the complexity of a website or a browser.
Chrome is an excellent web browser. No 4-key shortcuts and I cannot find the option to change any shortcut either - maybe there is one via some extension. If it is the case indeed, why would they limit that functionality? I think the answer is 'simplicity'. On Windows, they hide the menus too.
> The shortcuts do not have anything to do with an uncleaner UI, in the opposite, they (can) replace many menu commands.
Shortcuts correspond to their interface elements such as menus and buttons. The more keyboard shortcuts you wish to have, the more elements need to be there. The more UI elements, the more complex UI interface.