Basically we have 9 schemes:

• MITK standard
• MITK rotation uncoupled
• MITK rotation coupled
• MITK swivel

• PACS standard
• PACS level window
• PACS pan
• PACS scroll
• PACS zoom

The MITK modes each have an own complete .xml-file.
The PACS modes only add xml-text to the basic PACS.xml-file.

We should consider aiming for a consistent interaction scheme-handling (e.g. having each mode as an own complete .xml-file or, as written in the task description, use two basic modes and use all other modes as configurations with minimal .xml-files).

Complete .xml-files are used with SetEventConfig, whereas minimal .xml-files are used with AddEventConfig, which adds to a previously set event config.

I decided to go for having an own complete .xml-file for each mode, so I added the full definition for the different PACS modes.
The reason is that we want to have a consistent interaction scheme-handling which means either having full definition for both MITK and PACS modes or having base- and additional definition (like the original PACS modes). But changing the MITK configuration files to the base- and extra-mode variant requires event_variants to be empty in order to disable certain mouse events. Additionally any implementation needs to do two calls, one for setting the base-mode and one for adding the extra mode to make sure the correct base-mode is always set (e.g. switching from MITK to PACS). This was undesirable.

Pushed new branch T24368-Adjust-display-config-files.

The proposed change goes kind of in the opposite direction of recent changes that were made, specifically in D531 and part of D532. If the approach of D535 is to be continued, it would need to take into account D532, in which an additional PACS scheme was introduced that leaves the left mouse button unused.
I would personally prefer the direction we have been taking now, splitting up the config files into smaller chunks. This reduces code redundancy, instead of having almost identical config files many times.
Also, in my opinion the approach of D531 makes a lot of sense for overlapping interactions. It allows to change only the aspects of interaction that are necessary while staying oblivious to the current interaction (MITK default, with swivel, PACS, ...). If we want to use full configs, one would need any variation of each scheme for each situation where alterations may be necessary. For example 2D segmentation tools require the left mouse button, so any possible interaction scheme needs to have a corresponding version where the left mouse button is unused. If a tool requires something new, like the right mouse button, new config files have to be implemented for every existing interaction scheme instead of just one file that will be appended.

We discussed this and came to the conclusion to abandon D535.
@s434n will take over and create split MITK config files to be consistent with the PACS config file style.
Generally, as mentioned in the previous comment, splitting the config files "into smaller chunks" [...] "allows to change only the aspects of interaction that are necessary".