Command Classic: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Tsundoku's keyboard concept. Concept, goals, etc. here. | Tsundoku's keyboard concept. Concept, goals, etc. here. | ||
Variants | |||
* [http://www.keyboard-layout-editor.com/#/gists/c59d6670412c97797c2ea92c6a3b0b94 JIS] | |||
* [http://www.keyboard-layout-editor.com/#/gists/1f297de92b5bbdc4892b4ca80b2c19fe ANSI] | |||
== Design Goals == | == Design Goals == | ||
Revision as of 16:28, 28 May 2020
Tsundoku's keyboard concept. Concept, goals, etc. here.
Variants
Design Goals
- Not for Windows
- Mac/Sun-style bottom row modifier layout
- Large Command and Option keys for people who use them often
- Not minimalist
- Dedicated arrow keys
- Coincidentally smaller than 101/104 keyboards, but compactness itself is not a goal
- No IBM-style nav cluster
- Arrow keys can go on the bottom row as on many Apple keyboards
- Home/End/PageUp/PageDown on Fn layer of arrow keys
- Don't need Insert
- Forward Delete can go on tenkey (Clear on Macintosh keyboards)
- No dedicated function keys
- Can use Fn layer for number row
- Anticipates an environment where these are rarely used and only in specialized circumstances (eg. Minecraft)
- Has a tenkey
- No Num Lock (no modes!). Always numbers
Problems with existing PCBs
- No JIS Right Shift support
- Layouts all referenced from AT101/Windows 104
- 75%, 60%, etc... all expressed as reductions of AT101
- No consideration for different combinations of elements. Tenkeyless? 75% 60%? What about a tenkey but no IBM nav cluster?