On Sun, Aug 26, 2007 at 06:04:15PM +0200, Lars Hallberg wrote: > Josef Wolf skrev: > >[ I warm-up this old thread again... ] > > > >On Mon, Mar 05, 2007 at 12:02:31AM +0200, Lars Hallberg wrote: > >>a mock-up on a 90-key by one stroke finger keyboard. Think this might be > >>an usable and pretty efficient input method. > >> > >> http://www.micropp.se/openmoko/ > > > >This looks very promising. I like this idea. The only issue I see is that > >the least used characters (numbers) are the easiest to enter. IMHO, the > >mostly used characters should be accessible without dragging. > > I think it's a good default as it reuses the users knowledges from t9 > systems. It's important to be easy to pick up.
It is perfect for the "phone" functions. But we don't want to stop at trivial functions. > But an alternative layout > optimised for text input is good, as is a possibility for power users to > define there own layout, or even special layout for different > programs/tasks. I'm not sore what is the best layout for "text input". While I am pretty that numbers-on-main-positions is the second worst possibility (the worst would be to change positions automatically), I am not really sure what the best layout would be. As an example, for an emacs user, about half of the keystrokes are either ESC or CTRL-X. A lisp programmer would like parentheses on the main positions. I don't think we will ever be able to find the perfect layout for everybody. But we might be able to give people the ability to choose. As an exmple, I would like three layouts: 1. For phone functions, your original "phone" layout. 2. For mails, mostly used letters on main positions (as described in my last mail) but ESC and CTRL-X also on main positions. 3. For programming, some special chartacters should move on main positions. > In 2007.2 the scroll wheel is gone, so the key layout should probably be > 5x3 giving the number of functions / key like (the status bar is gone so > the bottom keys get less functions): > > 5 7 7 7 5 > 5 7 7 7 5 > 3 4 4 4 3 Ough, I don't really understand... You want up to 7 functions per key? > Make a total of 80 keys. Alternatively 6x3: > > 5 7 7 7 7 5 > 5 7 7 7 7 5 > 3 4 4 4 4 3 > > Make a total of 98 keys... Think You need a real device to find out what > is best. Too bad they are sold out :-( No chance to buy one :-(( > > The main good with this input method is its intuitive and probably > reasonable fast. But now I'm thinking more on how to use minimal of > screen space and work good one handed without visual attention... and > still be reasonable in speed. Maybe 8 functions per key (instead of 6) would be a benefit? Only a guess. You can't tell unles you actually tried it. _______________________________________________ OpenMoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community