How much flexibility on the keyboard layouts do we have?


mrpalmtop

Very Active Member
Joined
Mar 14, 2014
Messages
134
Hi Michael,

This is a bit of a restatement from the question posed by Mr_Loon regarding the spacebar. You had stated that the Pyra would have a double wide space key but did not answer his question as to where it would be located on the keyboard.

What I'm wondering is if we have any flexibility in the key placements or do we have to use the exact same number and locations for them that were on the Pandora, irrespective of what they'll be labeled?

Thanks!
 
The location of the space bar could be seen since months on the printed 3D cases.

Same place as with the Pandora.

The number of keys and location is different than on the Pandora - but as far as I have seen, the layouts in the keyboard threads already use the number of keys the Pyra has.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Cheers for that ED, thought that was the case but always good to hear official confirmation. One other question regarding KB layout, from looking at the recently released renders I can't see a dedicated power button so I assume the plan for Pyra is to use a keymat key for the power button, is this correct?
 
Oh, there is no hardware switch to power on/off the Pandora? Didn't even noticed yet. I actualy prefer HW switches to be sure the power is really off, for the health of the battery. ^^
 
The Pandora doesn't have a hardware power switch as well. The switch is just a trigger ;)
 
The location of the space bar could be seen since months on the printed 3D cases.


Same place as with the Pandora.


The number of keys and location is different than on the Pandora - but as far as I have seen, the layouts in the keyboard threads already use the number of keys the Pyra has.
Although they all used the same number of contact pad switches as presented on the motherboard, there was some experimentation with space bar placement (center and left ideas) and splitting the space bar into it's two distinct contact pads (easier to support international and Dvorak type layouts).  With the sheer volume of keyboard ideas and threads, I can appreciate that you did not have time to keep up with them all.

An example (one of mine):  http://www.keyboard-layout-editor.com/#/layouts/6c9d72c0045002506e532daaa5f2f7b4

From thread: http://boards.openpandora.org/topic/16872-and-now-for-something-completely-different-keyboard-option/page-8

As always, my suggestions and input are entirely free to you to use in part or whole or discard or ignore at your discretion.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The location of the space bar could be seen since months on the printed 3D cases.


Same place as with the Pandora.


The number of keys and location is different than on the Pandora - but as far as I have seen, the layouts in the keyboard threads already use the number of keys the Pyra has.
Does this imply that having a double-width space bar is a finalized decision?
 
To me it seems like he missed the potential of increasing the amount of keys and having singlewide space.

Not the idea, because he liked that, but the actual result.

From the vote he wanted full keyboard, which is more ideal with the singlewide. He seems ok with reduced keyboard too, so i guess we need to present a full layout with singlespace that does away with as many of the problems reduced and doublewide has as possible.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Last edited by a moderator:
"I want" could mean anything from a mild preference to a hard, non-negotiable constraint.
Indeed, but then there's this
All my phones had a large spacebar so far as well, some also only on the right or left side. And those REALLY were in need of more keys... Besides, AFAIR we had a poll about double or single-width spacebar already, and the double-width won. So why discuss again if the majority was in favor of it?
All that aside - he's been printing cases since forever, I don't think now is really the time to change that, however "trivial" the change may be.

There seems to be a lot (and I do mean a lot) of repetition with these queries, and I don't even read 90% the keyboard threads.

What is interesting is that there's a tonne of keyboard polls, but I can imagine there's a fair few like me who won't read or vote, and just trust in ED to make a fairly decent choice. Though I guess it's slightly easier for me, because I'm English, and don't have to worry about squiggles above or beneath my letters.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
To me it seems like he missed the potential of increasing the amount of keys and having singlewide space.
Niklaus has made is so that you can just cut a couple of surface traces to divide the contacts, and split the space bar into two independent switches. It's just then a matter of replacing or modifying the keymat to have two buttons, and bingo.


Most users want a space bar though, so the default keymat should have that feature.
 
Bar-key, in terms of space, is a feature of being central, it becomes illogical to talk about spacebar when you remove the factor that made it a bar, from the function that makes it a space.

It is _non-centered_, which avoided mention somehow. Ask how many people want their space_bar_ to be non-centered, and atleast then the people who understand it for what it is can decide, and its easier for everyone else not to fall in the trap set by not mentionining it.

The accuracy is not the reason people "want" a non-centered space-bar, they want it either because they dont know any better, or because its presented as if it made sense.

A non-centered space isnt common, but when its used, we see in practice examples of it being single-width. In accordance with how it can be explained and experienced to work. We see double-width too, but the difference is there is no holistic logic behind it. It is a false assumption.

I am happy to be wrong, until then, present valid reasons. Appeal to authority and ad populus arguments arent helping. It being easy to reverse doesnt explain why it should be implemented in the first place.

Being able to distinguish space more easily on first glance in no way outweighs the negatives it brings.

The reference level of finality is that of the amount/size and placement of keys, because its not easily changed. You cannot bring the same logic to dualwide non-centered space, because its not determined by form, and its on the contrary, more easily changed. It is a for-case-of-argument issue. You can do it both ways on the same limitations.

Singlewide space making sense stems from not only the function onto itself, but also the keyboard as a whole. Particularly with the latter you cant make the decisions before details are known.

This process is called design, and its hard to do. Making decisions first and dealing with the results later is comparitivly easy. Easy because making the right decisions is hard.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top