On Sat, 13 Aug 2005 05:05:50 -0400, Richard Wordingham
<richard.wordingham@...> wrote:
[...]

> the difference truly between keying and clicking is so vast that I only
> click for the unencoded stuff.

Indeed. I use key commands a lot, and reserve my quite-beloved Trackman
Marble [tm] for stuff that ought to work from the keys, or truly needs a
pointing device.

(Not shifting yet to [vellum]; follow-ups, maybe, though.)

Please, everybody, do realize that the wide four-row keyboard is truly a
typewriter layout, originally made for English, and there are *no*
essential technological limits (other than economies of scale) to how keys
can be positioned, nor are there any tight limits on how many. It's
looking as though a fifth row (or even a sixth?) could be very useful.
When you have eight key maps "stacked", using all eight binary
combinations of Shift, Alt-Gr, and Ctrl, that's overloading stuff some.

God forbid that we have all 64 combinations of left and right instances of
those keys! (Alt, of course) Could do modest CJK that way. Apologies for
the nightmare. (Nevertheless, I'm almost positive that, just that, could
be done with no changes to exiting keyboards; only software changes (very
fancy keymaps only?) would be needed. However, manipulating the six
qualifier keys would be a mess, or worse, I think.)

In the (PCD?) Maltron computer keyboard, keys are arranged seemingly
irregularly inside bowls that lie under one's fingers.

In general, it is incomparably easier to use wires to connect to something
located where an all-mechanical connection might not be practical. (Brake
and shifter cables on bicycles are about the best the M.E.s can ordinarily
do; and those are not bad for a few items and strong muscles.)


--
Nicholas Bodley /*|*\ Waltham, Mass. (Not "MA")

also flexible shafts, such as for trad. speedometers