> I don't like the idea of having to name the items in a particular way, at
> least not when is has to be the first character, I could live with the
> last character though, but I would prefer that the item type was stored in
> a place that is accessable from the edit menu. The item type could be
> displayed in the tree, but the "key" character would not be used
> for navigating.

Naming is great for quick navigation, so I'll continue using numbers as
an efficient way for skipping quickly through items I placed in the same
class (but I hope many more characters will become available).

I agree that the "key" will somewhat ruin the item name -- they do in my
items (prefixing with '9', etc.) -- but I live with this because of navigation
ease.

> The mappings could be stored in the menu file header.

Do you mean the 5 bytes that precede each item? One possiblity, similar to that
used in histories, is to hit Ctrl+Insert (for example) and mark the item
as NON-EXECUTABLE, ie, viewable as is. This could flip a bit in those 5 bytes,
if available (?). The item's name string would stay intact, but the color could
change, or a diamond added to the left. Navigating to these special items could
use the Insert key, the complment of Ctrl+Insert. This fits logically with the
other nearby navigation keys (Home, End, PgUp, PgDn...)

This looks very elegant, since both the item name and body are kept intact,
but is a lot of work for Kim at this time, so let's ignore it :-)

> Agree Possibly TYPE, and different types could be displayed in different
> colours.

Which is just another way of tagging; the Mac has had it for 20 years -- files
sorted and displayed by the color attribute, but let's not get into that zeppy
area here.

I really just want to bring to life #, !, and other dead keys.

> Agree, I have a list that I update when I think of things.

Let me guess where do you keep the list :-) I have a "ZTree testing, ZEPs, BUGs, URLs..." branch where I keep track of all things ZTree.