Re: Opening Up More Keymaps Re: Standardizing more key bindings?

[Alfred M. Szmidt]

       The exact same arguments could apply to C-c being "replaced" by C-x C-c. 

    There is a big difference in that C-c is already used by Emacs for
    other things, one is for users, and the second is for local
    keybindings in modes.  Changing that would break quite a bit of
    things.

   I meant when C-c was chosen, I wasn't suggesting to change things now. 

I suspect that C-c was choosen long before GNU Emacs.

   But if C-x C-c for C-c was never too confusing, C-x C-z for C-z
   should be fine too.

That makes no sense to me, C-x C-c and C-c <foo> have nothing in
common, one kills Emacs by asking the user the other is used by other
modes and users.  C-c (SIGINT) in Unix has a entierly different
behaviour than all of those...

   In any case, C-z can display a message guiding the user to the
   proper key sequence. And one could argue that C-c could show such a
   message too(without breaking anything).

C-c doesn't interrupt Emacs; so having it show a message would be
missleading to the user.