Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 ... 10
1
Hacks / Re: Balanced Keyboard Layout
« Last post by iandoug on Today at 01:18:49 AM »
The major difference from Patrick is finger weighted penalty.

Guess I will have to stare at your code :-)

For rolls, several factors to consider. Inward vs. outward; in-rolls take minimum effort, and out-rolls is some multiple of that. Also consider which fingers are used to roll. Perhaps a pre-defined array of penalty multipliers; where e.g. ring-index has lowest penalty and ring-pinky has highest penalty.

Also row-jumps eg S-R 0n Qwerty. Qwerty seems rather deficient in rolls. .... but I don't actually think I roll very much ... tend to hover and move my hands more... certainly do not type top row with pinky ever, I use ring, pinky is only used for things like Control and shift. So basically I'm a three-fingers-per-hand typist.
Re suggestions above, things like "RE" are quite easy, even though it's an outward roll.
I am aware of conventional wisdom of "inward rolls good, outward rolls bad" but is there any evidence to support that, or is it just one of those "accepted because it seems logical" kind of things?

Then final weight of the roll category. right now, the weights are 33 distance, 33 finger usage, 17 same finger, 17 same hand = 100. Either fit in the rolls on the same scale, which total exceed 100; or rescale everything so they all add up to 100 again.

Yeah, this is the part I was referring to.... as well as how do you weight the assorted rolls mentioned above. Also we're probably going to want to include row jumps in the calculations somewhere, I suggest doing rolls and jumps as one exercise as they are intertwined.

So we'll need a more complex matrix eg
Roll pinky-ring inward, same row
Roll pinky-ring outward, same row
Roll pinky-ring inward, middle to top
Roll pinky-ring inward, top to middle
Etc.
Made more complex when index or pinky has to move to different column.
And not forgetting the thumb in all those combos... which raises the question of is typing a space going to be considered a roll?
And how long is a roll? Two keys?

Which is going to be a lot of thumbsucking to pick values which will stand up to scrutiny... though I suppose Opt has already done this exercise?
Will ponder this some more.

Cheers, Ian
2
Hacks / Re: Balanced Keyboard Layout
« Last post by Den on Today at 12:43:00 AM »
Can we first take a step back and look at how your current scoring works?
So that I can understand it, and that any suggestions are in line with the calculations etc.

thanks, Ian

The major difference from Patrick is finger weighted penalty.

For rolls, several factors to consider. Inward vs. outward; in-rolls take minimum effort, and out-rolls is some multiple of that. Also consider which fingers are used to roll. Perhaps a pre-defined array of penalty multipliers; where e.g. ring-index has lowest penalty and ring-pinky has highest penalty.

Then final weight of the roll category. right now, the weights are 33 distance, 33 finger usage, 17 same finger, 17 same hand = 100. Either fit in the rolls on the same scale, which total exceed 100; or rescale everything so they all add up to 100 again.
3
Hacks / Re: Balanced Keyboard Layout
« Last post by iandoug on Today at 12:30:16 AM »
You mention you use BEAKL EZ on a matrix keyboard. When you say "matrix", are you refering to an ortholinear design like the Planck -- literally a matrix?

Further to Den's reply above, see the matrix designs :
http://shenafu.com/code/keyboard/klatest/#/config

Attached mockup for my first prototype, this is a simpler version (ErgoLinear) of "Matrix".


4
Hacks / Re: Balanced Keyboard Layout
« Last post by Den on Today at 12:19:02 AM »
A matrix keyboard is any board that has straight vertical columns. Including Planck, Kinesis, Ergodox, Maltron. I'm on the Kinesis Advantage2.

The reason for matrix design is mainly to differentiate board designs for purpose of layout analysis, as opposed to de facto staggered design. matrix on KLA is the simplest design that minimizes the penalties from excess lateral movement, and thus yields better scores on these comparison programs. hence I don't bother putting newer BEAKL layouts on other board designs any more.

Nevertheless, you can use BEAKL on any board, and they will still work very well. You can compare BEAKL 32 and BEAKL Opted4 on standard boards with other layouts on the standard board.

My ADNW/Opt config is constantly changing (alas I don't archive older versions). see attached. The latest effort grid (that created BEAKL 8) looks like this:

Code: [Select]
Left hand effort
15   1.5  1    1.5  5
5    0.5  0.5  0.5  1.5
7    2    5    1    7

Other settings are just as important. Be aware if you set them too high, they could overtake the effort grid, reducing its importance.

BEAKL EZ is a solid choice. But BEAKL 8 seems the most ideal BEAKL layout thus far; well, there's also P_RN if you can map that onto your board (I think it works better with smaller thumb keys, like on the Planck). It's more apparent when viewing the heatmaps; look for the home block plus the thumb home. My idea of the home block consists of the top, home, and bottom rows for the ring, middle, and index fingers at the home columns, forming a 3x3 block.
5
Hacks / Re: Balanced Keyboard Layout
« Last post by iandoug on Yesterday at 10:53:22 PM »
should i incorporate rolls now? how should they be scored? how much should they account for in the final score?

Can we first take a step back and look at how your current scoring works?
So that I can understand it, and that any suggestions are in line with the calculations etc.

thanks, Ian
6
Hacks / Re: Balanced Keyboard Layout
« Last post by sdothum on Yesterday at 09:40:39 PM »
Den, a few questions:

You mention you use BEAKL EZ on a matrix keyboard. When you say "matrix", are you refering to an ortholinear design like the Planck -- literally a matrix?

I use Plancks exclusively in a "wide" layout -- left and right 5x3 blocks with the centre 2x3 column for modifier chords and row 4 for thumb operated shift, space, tab etc. and layer toggling. So, your BEAKL EZ 30 key layout fits my needs perfectly!

If you are using a keyboard with a slightly curved vertical layout like an Ergodox then your largely symmetrical effort grid is a good fit. On a perfectly rectangular layout like the Planck, might an effort grid

8 1 1 1 4   4 1 1 1 8
5 0 0 0 2   2 0 0 0 5
7 2 3 1 3   3 1 3 2 7


better reflect the upper reach for the pinky and index fingers? If so, how might the BEAKL EZ look now?

If you don't mind sharing, I would really like to see your ADNW configuration file for the BEAKL EZ for your tweaks beyond the effort grid -- unless it's not applicable.

Thanks for sharing your work. Looking forward to getting reasonably proficient on BEAKL.

Steven
7
Hacks / Re: Balanced Keyboard Layout
« Last post by iandoug on Yesterday at 05:59:25 PM »
Looks like some of my tablet/phone layouts. Too much index movement for 2-handed touch-typing, but good for hunt-and-peck because of central cluster.

I built it and moved all fingers one column towards centre of keyboard.
Still got bad scores on Alice.
Even after I had a go at improving it.
8
Hacks / Re: Screen resolution
« Last post by iandoug on Yesterday at 05:55:06 PM »
text input area is 600px. seems you have a lot of stuff at the top and bottom of your screen.

New version is better, thanks :-)
9
Hacks / Re: Balanced Keyboard Layout
« Last post by Den on Yesterday at 04:44:35 PM »
should i incorporate rolls now? how should they be scored? how much should they account for in the final score?
10
Hacks / Re: Screen resolution
« Last post by Den on Yesterday at 04:18:07 PM »
What screen resolution you running at?

KLAtest is a bit tall for my screen.

text input area is 600px. seems you have a lot of stuff at the top and bottom of your screen.
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 ... 10