But how can it be that not misplacing the ? key (pressed rarery) is more important than misplacing the UP key? I mean that not only it is incompatible with normal keyboards (even laptop keyboards) but with human thinking as well? (Before you ask, I have a LOT of experience with the C-64 keyboard. Both the cursor keys and both the joystick "emulation" keys suck.)
Paul Fox wrote: > noiseehc wrote: > > Could you just put UP to the place of ?, put ? to the place of RIGHT, > > and put RIGHT to the place of UP? > > I am not THAT old to understand what is so cool about that "hjkl vi > > arrangement" and I guess no children will either. > > I feel that moving just one more key from its 101 key standard position > > cannot suck more that the current arrow key arrangement... > > please don't misunderstand -- the intention of the arrow key arrangement > never had the goal of recreating hjkl. if that had been the goal, we > could have put the arrows _on_ h, j, k, and l, and used the Fn key to > produce them, which is how those vi commands came about in the first > place: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:KB_Terminal_ADM3A.svg > obviously, compatibility with a 35 year old terminal is uninteresting. > > the real goal was to not misplace the ? key. > > paul > > > > > > > Walter Bender wrote: > > > On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 12:24 PM, Tiago Marques <tiago...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > >> I was just looking at the layout again and just noticed the new arrow > keys > > >> placement. That is a very awkward placement. Is that definitive or can > you > > >> do something like shorten the shift key to accommodate the UP arrow? > > >> I suppose that would be another hard sell for deployments against > netbooks > > >> with the regular placement of keys. > > >> Best regads, > > >> Tiago > > >> > > > > > > We debated this one. A shorter shift key would be difficult to type > > > on. We opted to emulate the hjkl vi arrangement. > > > > > > -walter > > > > > > > > >> On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 5:15 PM, Tiago Marques <tiago...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > >> > > >>> I must ask, what's the default behavior of function keys in the new > > >>> layout? Fn changes them to F keys, or are they F keys without Fn > pressed? > > >>> Tiago > > >>> > > >>> On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 2:49 PM, Mikus Grinbergs <mi...@bga.com> wrote: > > >>> > > >>>>> The following are the keyboard layouts and legends for these > > >>>>> new keyboards. Much thanks to Walter Bender for developing > > >>>>> these given a bad set of constraints. > > >>>>> http://wiki.laptop.org/go/OLPC_English_Non-membrane_Keyboard > > >>>>> > > >>>> There may be users who wish to plug in an external keyboard. Such > > >>>> external keyboards often have function keys grouped in sets of four. > > >>>> Such grouping places F5 at the beginning of a row of four keys, and > > >>>> places F6 in the middle of a row of four keys. > > >>>> > > >>>> Suppose users might be pressing the key for 'frame' more often than > the > > >>>> key for 'search'. Should the 'frame' function be assigned to the F5 > > >>>> key, since on external keyboards the F5 key might be easier to locate > ? > > >>>> > > >>>> mikus > > >>>> > > >>>> _______________________________________________ > > >>>> Devel mailing list > > >>>> Devel@lists.laptop.org > > >>>> http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel > > >>>> > > >> _______________________________________________ > > >> Devel mailing list > > >> Devel@lists.laptop.org > > >> http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > part 2 text/plain 129 > > _______________________________________________ > > Devel mailing list > > Devel@lists.laptop.org > > http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel > > =--------------------- > paul fox, p...@laptop.org > > > _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
