Post by amberv on Nov 1, 2005 18:42:33 GMT
I am sure that you have given this some thought, but I am finding that the default binding of Cmd-W is a little bit ornery, at best. The times when I wish to actually close the project, and stay within the application, are very few. Generally, when I am done with the project for a while, I am done with Scrivener; Cmd-Q.
The keystroke is embedded in the minds of Mac users as a "close this document; close this sub-window" action.
In the context of Scrivener, it is anti-mnemonic, since the other project related function has a shift key added to the base keystroke. Cmd-Shift-W, would seem to be the logical "close project" action. Cmd-N creates a new text document; Cmd-Shift-N, a new project. So what should Cmd-W do? At this point, probably nothing. Scrivener does not really seem to have a concept of open and closed documents. It opens and closes on demand. So for us habit prone people who tap Cmd-W when done with something, perhaps it should just go back a step in the History?
The keystroke is embedded in the minds of Mac users as a "close this document; close this sub-window" action.
In the context of Scrivener, it is anti-mnemonic, since the other project related function has a shift key added to the base keystroke. Cmd-Shift-W, would seem to be the logical "close project" action. Cmd-N creates a new text document; Cmd-Shift-N, a new project. So what should Cmd-W do? At this point, probably nothing. Scrivener does not really seem to have a concept of open and closed documents. It opens and closes on demand. So for us habit prone people who tap Cmd-W when done with something, perhaps it should just go back a step in the History?
