Question About Learning Colemak

[gatorjon]

I have a problem that I hope others have had. I am looking for advice for perfecting Colemak.

I have a bit of a unique situation. I never learned how to type. I would always hunt and peck. So when I decided to learn I decided to learn on Colemak for various reasons. That was about three years ago. I was successful at learning and can touch type all but the "shift+" functions. I never change the physical lay out of the board and learned "cold turkey" I was able to touch type after a few months. I still have to hunt and peck when QWERTY layout is enabled.

Here's the problem. I still make tons of mistakes, particularly I switch up "a" and "o", but there are other letters I still can't "master." Also, my speed is still quite slow with my best WPM being 64 with no mistakes . This is after having taken over 1000 typing tests on various sites.

My question is: Has anyone had a similar experience? Either way, has anyone found a better way to improve typing accuracy/speed with Colemak?

[davkol]

I've been using Colemak for three years as well, and I made many mistakes along the way. Hopefully, I've learned from them.

The very first mistake was picking Colemak (although I was a QWERTY touch typist, which made the choice less wrong). I used to think more DSK-like hand alternation would hurt my accuracy, but long one-handed sequences (not everything is a nice roll like RST) have been slowing me down without significant benefits in comfort in the end. Sticking with one-handed ZXCV combos has hurt my left palm. Also, the similarity between QWERTY and Colemak basically destroyed my QWERTY touch-typing skill, a poor one, but still an occasionally useful skill.

The other problem were pretty random practice habits. Everything could have been much easier, if I read about performance psychology and learning beforehand, and stuck to a regular meaningful training routine. Practice regularly. Like 10 minutes every night.
Also, focus on one thing at a time, e.g. one trigram (stats in Amphetype are helpful). Do it slowly and then push your edge, record your hands on a camera and then correct mistakes (provided you know what typing *should* look like).

[nomaded]

When I was learning Dvorak, I had a print out of the layout next to the monitor, and I used an online typing tutor that got me used to typing with the correct fingers. This allowed my brain to get used to the new locations of letters. Also, it helped me keep a picture of layout in my mind and which keys I should hit with which finger. Eventually my fingers knew where to go without bringing up the mental image of the layout. I still make mistakes while typing, that's why I've assigned backspace to a key that I can easily hit with my thumb (currently on an ErgoDox, but various other keyboards in the past).

Honestly, I have no idea how fast I type. I don't really care that much. For me, changing layouts was more about switching to a designed layout that would keep my fingers more on home row, for more comfortable typing.

[gatorjon]

Thanks for the advice guys . I looked up Amphetype and have set a practice schedule. I also printed out the layout and taped it to my monitor. I have already noticed improvements.

[Hazel]

Everyone has their own "natural" speed/accuracy limit beyond which it will be difficult to progress any further.   I too learned Colemak after 15 years of hunt-peck on qwerty.  With a few weeks I surpassed my qwerty speed (45wpm), and within a few months I leveled off at my new speed (65-70 wpm), which has held steady since then.

Don't worry too much about speed.  Just rejoice that you're touch-typing comfortably on a superior (to qwerty) layout!

[Hazel]

One thing that I do to improve accuracy is:  If I notice I am making mistakes on a particular hand, I will concentrate on that hand.  I visualize the layout on that half of the board and think about what the fingers are doing.  I'm not necessarily thinking ahead or consciously directing my fingers, just paying attention as the muscle memory does its thing.  I'm not sure how or why this helps, but it does.

Getting an Ergodox or similar board may help you with accuracy (especially if you tend to mix up P and G).  It certainly fixed my bad habit of typing 'C' with my index finger!   I still use the left shift almost exclusively, I know it's wrong and it hurts my speed and accuracy, but that's what I'm comfortable with so I roll with it.

[cruzin]

Getting an Ergodox or similar board may help you with accuracy (especially if you tend to mix up P and G).  It certainly fixed my bad habit of typing 'C' with my index finger!   I still use the left shift almost exclusively, I know it's wrong and it hurts my speed and accuracy, but that's what I'm comfortable with so I roll with it.

I know getting an Advantage helped me with using the wrong fingers. I didn't realize how many bad typing habits I had until I got it. Now I love staggered column layouts, and can't type for crap on staggered rows.

And now that I feel fairly comfortable with QWERTY on it, I've started learning Colemak. It's frustrating to be slow again, but it'll be worth it once I get up to speed.

[deci]

The easiest way to improve accuracy and speed in typing is to find a typing program that records your most common problem areas and generates lessons that focus on those keys.
You should also practice typing the most common digraphs and trigraphs for speed.

I use my own custom layout that is basically a modified version of Colemak so I use this program:
http://www.typefastertypingtutor.com/

It has lesson plans for slowest and least accurate and there's a lesson plan made by Shai Colemak that you can dl here:
http://colemak.com/TypeFaster

I like this program because you can create your own lessons for it by just throwing a txt file (with the correct header paragraph) in the Layout folder.
For example I have one that is just a mix of the most common di's and tri's.

For web based this is a pretty good one that supports Colemak:
http://www.keybr.com/


Good luck!

[steve.v]

0. Have fun.
1. 65 wpm with consistent 98% accuracy.
2. 70 wpm with consistent 98% accuracy.
3. 75 wpm with consistent 98% accuracy.
4. 80 wpm with consistent 98% accuracy. 
5. Continue if you want to be faster but typing faster isn't ideal unless your work requires it.

[cdelahousse]

I've been using Colemak for about a year and a half now. I learned it using GNU Typist drills over the course of a month. It took me a while to learn to up to my old QWERTY touch typing speed, but I got "fast enough" in about a month and a half. I'm a programmer.

If I could go back, I would not have learned Colemak. I consider it a regret.

Here are the reasons I regret learning Colemak:
1) Nobody knows about it. Having to explain the what and why of Colemak is getting tiring. I now basically just say it is "DVORAK for Hipsters". Everybody know DVORAK though.
2) Less community support. Vim and other tools have way better support for DVORAK than COLEMAK because the former is more popular.

 I don't regret learning a new layout, but I do regret my choice of layout. I should have chosen DVORAK. Any ergonmic layout will be better than QWERTY. DVORAK is better mostly because of community support. That being said, I love knowing at least one ergonomic layout. My RSI issues are long gone. My geek cred is up.

Make sure to keep up your QWERTY skills. Not doing so was one of the biggest mistakes I've made.

[caseyandgina]

Pardon my ignorance, but what advantages does Colemak have over Dvorak? When I learned Dvorak I was up to 60wpm in a month and 100wpm (where I still am today) in 2 months.

[davkol]

Pardon my ignorance, but what advantages does Colemak have over Dvorak? When I learned Dvorak I was up to 60wpm in a month and 100wpm (where I still am today) in 2 months.

Tarmak (transitional layouts for smooth conversion from QWERTY, although it's a big of a niche), better compatibility with existing software (i.e. hotkeys/shortcuts) and preference for rolls over heavy hand alternation (a matter of personal preference).

I'm not saying I agree with the philosophy behind Colemak, but yeah, it's out there and it isn't bad.

[WiNloSt]

I've been touch typing for about 10 years, although English is not my primary language. I was going QWERTY all the way until about a year ago I learn Colemak. After that it's whole different story.

Mastering Colemak wasn't the no. 1 problem for me but maintaining abilities to type in both QWERTY and colemak was. After first month I learn Colemak my QWERTY speed drop from around 80 to 60 with less consistent key stroke I had only like 90% accuracy at that time. This problem persisted for a few months. What I was doing is to type in both QWERTY and Colemak if possible. Had I try using only one layout would definitely kill the ability to type in the other layout.

And what I am doing now is typing Colemak at work and keeping QWERTY at home (I'm a programmer). Go this way I am able to maintain both my Colemak and QWERTY for around 80 wpm thought my Colemak is slightly better.

But another ongoing problem for me is consistency. I usually have not less than 95% accuracy with 80 wpm. But when I had 98%+ accuracy I could easily go 90+ wpm and even hit 100 wpm sometimes.

I still don't know how to fix this issue since I didn't type English all day. I feel like my native language typing is far more consistent and way more faster because I still chat with my friends in my native language every.

[caseyandgina]

I had touch-typed on QWERTY for several years before learning Dvorak myself.  I had many years of hunt-and-peck before that and was able to type about 60wpm on QWERTY.  I did not find Dvorak difficult to switch to - it took me MUCH less time than QWERTY, and I have a very low error rate whereas it was higher with QWERTY.  If Colemak existed in 2001 I hadn't heard about it, and it *seems* to me that switching between two similar layouts would lead to higher error rate versus switching between two dissimilar layouts (e.g. QWERTY and Dvorak), because the same words would feel similar, sometimes identical in one portion, and then a letter farther in would be in a different place on one or the other keymaps.  I have lost touch-type ability on QWERTY, but I really don't care - what's the loss?  I can easily switch keymaps on any machine and have never felt "held back" in any way by my choice to use an alternative layout.  If for some reason I can't, it's usually some unusual case like a public machine or something, in which case hunt-and-peck suffices just fine for the 30 seconds I need it.

Also, regarding mention of Typist and other graphical typing programs - EVERY graphical program I've ever tried has at least a slight delay between keypress and something appearing on the screen, in some programs it's not so slight.  Usually this is just milliseconds, but annoys me, particularly when I'm trying to work on typing speed and as instant of feedback as possible.  When I learned Dvorak, I did so by booting up DOS natively, and running KP Typing Tutor.  It's a wonderful experience!  I don't know if it has support for Colemak or not and have not used it in many years, but it may be worth looking into, as for me it was infinitely better than any fancier graphical utility I've tried since.

[Hazel]

Pardon my ignorance, but what advantages does Colemak have over Dvorak? When I learned Dvorak I was up to 60wpm in a month and 100wpm (where I still am today) in 2 months.

Dvorak is optimized to maximize hand alteration, at the expense of same-finger keystrokes.  This is (IMO) the correct optimization when dealing with a mechanical typewriter, where you have to punch the keys with your entire hand.  The left-right-left-right alteration lets you prepare each stroke ahead of time.  If you need to punch two keys in a row on the same hand, it doesn't matter which finger you use - you've already lost.  (And more simply, hand alteration is less likely to result in jams.)

Colemak is optimized to minimize same-finger keystrokes, at the expense of hand alteration.  The thinking is that on a modern keyboard, hitting two different keys in a row with the same finger is what slows you down; the need to alternate hands is a relic of mechanical typewriters.   This gives rise to the so-called "rolls" that Colemak is known for.  (I've heard people say Colemak is "optimized for rolls" which is not really true: rolls are a consequence of the optimization, not the reason for it.)

Beside the optimization philosophy (which you may or may not agree with), the most practical benefit of Colemak over Dvorak is that common shortcut keys (Q,W,A,Z,X,C,V) remain the same as Qwerty.  In addition, Colemak avoids a few of the things that bugged me about Dvorak (overworking the of the ring and pinkie fingers and that hard-to-reach F key).  But in the end, both layouts are great.  Dvorak is certainly better known and has wider support.  Personally, I spent a month learning Dvorak, before trying Colemak and discovering that it "clicked" for me in a way Dvorak didn't.   It really comes down to what works well for you.

[davkol]

Hand alternation could be arguably good for speed.

It has probably only little to do with typewriter jamming, because DSK is quite a failure in this regard compared to QWERTY and especially Sholes' later creation, according to Kay (2013).

[caseyandgina]

Also, regarding mention of Typist and other graphical typing programs - EVERY graphical program I've ever tried has at least a slight delay between keypress and something appearing on the screen, in some programs it's not so slight.  Usually this is just milliseconds, but annoys me, particularly when I'm trying to work on typing speed and as instant of feedback as possible.  When I learned Dvorak, I did so by booting up DOS natively, and running KP Typing Tutor.  It's a wonderful experience!  I don't know if it has support for Colemak or not and have not used it in many years, but it may be worth looking into, as for me it was infinitely better than any fancier graphical utility I've tried since.

I just realized the KP download link on that page does't work, but you can find links here that do.

I just tried running it using Boxer on OS X and it worked great.  It doesn't come with a Colemak training file, but they are simple text files so no reason you could not easily make one yourself!

[jacobolus]

Hand alternation could be arguably good for speed. It has probably only little to do with typewriter jamming, because DSK is quite a failure in this regard compared to QWERTY and especially Sholes' later creation, according to Kay (2013).

Link?

Edit: http://www.strath.ac.uk/media/departments/economics/researchdiscussionpapers/2013/13-24FINAL.pdf

Colemak is optimized to minimize same-finger keystrokes, at the expense of hand alteration.  The thinking is that on a modern keyboard, hitting two different keys in a row with the same finger is what slows you down; the need to alternate hands is a relic of mechanical typewriters.   This gives rise to the so-called "rolls" that Colemak is known for.

I think this is quite simplistic. (And alternating hands isn’t just a relic of mechanical typewriters.)

A pair of letters with the same finger striking different keys is obviously very inefficient, but there are many other kinds of hand motions which are about as uncomfortable/inefficient. For example, the middle and ring fingers share some of the same muscle systems, so e.g. typing a bottom row key with the middle finger followed by a top row key with the ring finger is extremely slow, and even typing with those fingers one row apart is pretty bad (as in QWERTY DW, CS, or KO).

All of the analytical models of keyboard layouts I’ve seen online unfairly penalize some easy key combinations and don’t sufficiently penalize some difficult combinations. Because they are based on heuristics across the whole hand instead of treating each particular pair of keys separately.

[HoffmanMyster]

I've been using Colemak for three years as well, and I made many mistakes along the way. Hopefully, I've learned from them.

The very first mistake was picking Colemak (although I was a QWERTY touch typist, which made the choice less wrong). I used to think more DSK-like hand alternation would hurt my accuracy, but long one-handed sequences (not everything is a nice roll like RST) have been slowing me down without significant benefits in comfort in the end. Sticking with one-handed ZXCV combos has hurt my left palm. Also, the similarity between QWERTY and Colemak basically destroyed my QWERTY touch-typing skill, a poor one, but still an occasionally useful skill.

Hmm.  I'm new to alternative layouts, having just set up my kishsaver with colemak due to the ease of key placement changes and the programmable controller.  But now your post makes me unsure if I should go through with this.  I have been touch typing QWERTY for quite some time, and have no speed issues that I'm aware of (80-90 WPM).  I mostly want to learn a new layout in hopes that it might feel better and more natural, and because I can.

I assumed that colemak has benefits over QWERTY, but it seems like you're implying it doesn't, in your experience.  I'm curious to know if you're more disappointed with choosing something other than QWERTY or with choosing colemak over dvorak?

[Tiramisuu]

I've been using Colemak for three years as well, and I made many mistakes along the way. Hopefully, I've learned from them.

The very first mistake was picking Colemak (although I was a QWERTY touch typist, which made the choice less wrong). I used to think more DSK-like hand alternation would hurt my accuracy, but long one-handed sequences (not everything is a nice roll like RST) have been slowing me down without significant benefits in comfort in the end. Sticking with one-handed ZXCV combos has hurt my left palm. Also, the similarity between QWERTY and Colemak basically destroyed my QWERTY touch-typing skill, a poor one, but still an occasionally useful skill.

Hmm.  I'm new to alternative layouts, having just set up my kishsaver with colemak due to the ease of key placement changes and the programmable controller.  But now your post makes me unsure if I should go through with this.  I have been touch typing QWERTY for quite some time, and have no speed issues that I'm aware of (80-90 WPM).  I mostly want to learn a new layout in hopes that it might feel better and more natural, and because I can.

I assumed that colemak has benefits over QWERTY, but it seems like you're implying it doesn't, in your experience.  I'm curious to know if you're more disappointed with choosing something other than QWERTY or with choosing colemak over dvorak?

The advantages of alternate layouts are less flailing about.  This doesn't result in a significantly higher maximum typing speed it seems though.   Our speed limit in typing appears not to be about the finger speed.   Reduce injury seems like a fairly good possibility, though after years of practice on the old style strengths and styles develop that avoid injury for mosts so....

I'm planning on taking up partially optimized colemak this year but mostly because it's a good exercise for the brain rather than hoping for any significant improvement in typing speed or reduced aches.

[deci]

Colemak and pretty much all alternative layouts have huge advantages over QWERTY.

Colemak is not optimized for hand alteration, but it still has better hand alteration than QWERTY.

There is a large debate over whether hand alteration or rolls are more efficient, and some studies such as MTGAP have theorized that the most efficient trigraphs are actually ones where 2 letters are rolled on one hand and the other letter is on the opposite hand.

Honestly, keyboard layout optimization is a deep rabbit hole where it seems obvious at first glance what is more or less efficient, but the more you study it, the more complicated it gets.
Different layouts all try to optimize different aspects. Dvorak has great hand alteration, but higher same finger repeats, loses the most of the convenient ctrl editing short cuts, as well as overloading the right pinky with high frequency letters. When you try to optimize in one area, you end up sacrificing in another. Which area should be weighed more heavily is always up to the user.

I mean even the main premise of putting better keys on the home position is up for debate and nobody actually agrees on what the home position really should be.
For example, Workman layout tries to account for the way fingers actually work (middle fingers are longer and reach the top row easier but has trouble curling, index finger is short but can curl and hit the bottom row easier, etc.) Thus the middle rows where H and G live are considered poor positions in this layout but prime positions in most other layouts.

If we really want to talk about optimized, we should really be looking at layouts like Balance 12, HIEAMTSRN, and the different versions of MTGAP. These layouts have low finger repeat and good hand alteration as well as more optimized punctuation but they require a lot of pinky usage.

Here is a site that lets you compare metrics on a ton of layouts as well as custom ones vs any text you want:
http://patorjk.com/keyboard-layout-analyzer/#/main
Just make sure you ignore their rankings because rankings are totally based on how you weigh the different attributes.

And here is a site that lets you try different layouts in the browser:
http://blog.mikekuehn.ca/keyboard-layouts/

I spent an entire summer researching and playing with layouts so ask me any questions you have.
I'll just tell you right now though that the answer is usually "depends on your personal preference."

PS. Speed is usually not something you gain too much of with a new layout if you're already good at QWERTY. What you gain is a more comfortable typing experience that doesn't tire your hand out as much and helps prevent RSI.

[davkol]

I've been using Colemak for three years as well, and I made many mistakes along the way. Hopefully, I've learned from them.

The very first mistake was picking Colemak (although I was a QWERTY touch typist, which made the choice less wrong). I used to think more DSK-like hand alternation would hurt my accuracy, but long one-handed sequences (not everything is a nice roll like RST) have been slowing me down without significant benefits in comfort in the end. Sticking with one-handed ZXCV combos has hurt my left palm. Also, the similarity between QWERTY and Colemak basically destroyed my QWERTY touch-typing skill, a poor one, but still an occasionally useful skill.

Hmm.  I'm new to alternative layouts, having just set up my kishsaver with colemak due to the ease of key placement changes and the programmable controller.  But now your post makes me unsure if I should go through with this.  I have been touch typing QWERTY for quite some time, and have no speed issues that I'm aware of (80-90 WPM).  I mostly want to learn a new layout in hopes that it might feel better and more natural, and because I can.

I assumed that colemak has benefits over QWERTY, but it seems like you're implying it doesn't, in your experience.  I'm curious to know if you're more disappointed with choosing something other than QWERTY or with choosing colemak over dvorak?

It does have benefits, it's way more comfortable and it could be argued that it's "comfortable enough" to dismiss alternatives, but the same is often said about QWERTY, isn't it?

The thing about QWERTY is that it's not only compatible with mechanical typewriters (nowadays irrelevant), but also compatible with software (or rather software has been designed for QWERTY): clipboard (ZXCV), window management (QW), cursor movement (hjkl), game hotkeys (WASD and or unit hotkeys in RTS), etc. Colemak keeps some of these (ZXCV, QW,…) in place, but still breaks others (hjkl, WASD). DSK completely avoids it to a large extent though, because (1) it's been around (and popular) enough to have community-made key maps (I believe there are alternative remapping configs for Vim, Emacs and a lot of other apps), and (2) there's the Dvorak-QWERTY layout in OS X (and the same thing can be implemented in AHK and perhaps other tools)—it switches the layout from DSK to QWERTY while a modifier (Control/Command/…) is being held, thus effectively keeps QWERTY shortcuts in most apps.

Layouts such as Colemak or Minimak make nearly fluent transition from QWERTY possible, thanks to Tarmak or Minimak steps respectively. It's great in certain use cases (i.e. if you don't need to know more layouts at the same time, and can't afford a big productivity crash for a while), but not relevant in case of learning from scratch.

Comfort&speed is obviously a matter of personal preference. The problem with Colemak is that although its design is rather poorly documented, I've noticed some mentions that it was made with low-profile flat laptop keyboards in mind (easier sliding between keys) in addition to the obvious backward compatibility with QWERTY. At the same time, I think the design principles behind DSK or say the 1907 Bulgarian keyboard are sound and more suitable for the floating typing technique on mechanical keyboards (with usually longer keystrokes), but these layouts are ancient and the analysis could have been done better with the aim of computers.

That's why I'm slowly working on a new layout, quite close to AdnW (alternation-heavy layout optimized for German and English). However, it's slow, because I try to take into account as many factors as possible, including all kinds of ways of entering diacritic marks (common in Western Slavic languages). Unfortunately, existing models/algorithms don't help too much, because their creators usually didn't consider this at all, or there's no implementation that I'm aware of (see papers about solving the Keyboard Assignment Problem using Cyber Swarm or Ant Collony techniques).

[jacobolus]

That's why I'm slowly working on a new layout, quite close to AdnW (alternation-heavy layout optimized for German and English). However, it's slow, because I try to take into account as many factors as possible, including all kinds of ways of entering diacritic marks (common in Western Slavic languages). Unfortunately, existing models/algorithms don't help too much, because their creators usually didn't consider this at all, or there's no implementation that I'm aware of (see papers about solving the Keyboard Assignment Problem using Cyber Swarm or Ant Collony techniques).

If you have more information about this at some point, please start a thread for it. :-)

[davkol]

Well, the worst case scenario (provided I finish it) is that you'll request my thesis and find a translator. ^_^

[deci]

That's why I'm slowly working on a new layout, quite close to AdnW (alternation-heavy layout optimized for German and English). However, it's slow, because I try to take into account as many factors as possible, including all kinds of ways of entering diacritic marks (common in Western Slavic languages). Unfortunately, existing models/algorithms don't help too much, because their creators usually didn't consider this at all, or there's no implementation that I'm aware of (see papers about solving the Keyboard Assignment Problem using Cyber Swarm or Ant Collony techniques).

If you have more information about this at some point, please start a thread for it. :-)

Yes, I'd love to read more of your findings as well.
I've played with custom layouts for quite a while and constantly end up tweaking and changing things.
And that's only for English... adding multi language support is beyond my cognitive limits I'm afraid.

Currently I've actually started favoring Wide layouts where they right hand moves 1 column over to the right.
This offloads a lot of the work from your right pinky to your index finger and puts you closer to backspace, enter, and r-shift.
It also balances your keyboard better for lap typing (useful for laptops).

Ironically, I actually really like QWERTY. I've never really thought it was uncomfortable and it is more convenient than all other layouts by a huge margin due to software support as davkol mentioned.
I got to about 50wpm in Colemak when I stopped practicing it because 1: It was really hard for me to maintain QWERTY and Colemak skills at the same time due to similarity (although others have succeeded) and 2: My fingers actually feel cramped. I kind of actually like the feel of my fingers flying all over the keyboard as I have always hovered my hands and don't have a problem moving them around.

[PieterGen]

....I'm slowly working on a new layout, quite close to AdnW (alternation-heavy layout optimized for German and English). However, it's slow, because I try to take into account as many factors as possible, including all kinds of ways of entering diacritic marks (common in Western Slavic languages). Unfortunately, existing models/algorithms don't help too much, because their creators usually didn't consider this at all, or there's no implementation that I'm aware of (see papers about solving the Keyboard Assignment Problem using Cyber Swarm or Ant Collony techniques).

Hi Davkol, please correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't we talking about two different subjects here? 1) what is the "optimum" keyboard, how do we weigh things like distance, alternation, same finger use and so on; and 2) what is the algorithm, what is the path to calculate keyboards?

For 1) you can set up your own rules, such as "penalty x for same finger use, penalty Y for use of shift and row 4, and so on. Problem number 2) is harder. How can you be sure that you have the optimal keyboard? I suppose you know the approaches of Carpalx[]/url and [url=http://mathematicalmulticore.wordpress.com/the-keyboard-layout-project/]MTGAP.

This may be a dumb question, but can't you use either carpalx program (written in Perl) or mtgap's program (written in C) as a base, and modify that to your needs? Or do they miss essential aspects?

[davkol]

....I'm slowly working on a new layout, quite close to AdnW (alternation-heavy layout optimized for German and English). However, it's slow, because I try to take into account as many factors as possible, including all kinds of ways of entering diacritic marks (common in Western Slavic languages). Unfortunately, existing models/algorithms don't help too much, because their creators usually didn't consider this at all, or there's no implementation that I'm aware of (see papers about solving the Keyboard Assignment Problem using Cyber Swarm or Ant Collony techniques).

Hi Davkol, please correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't we talking about two different subjects here? 1) what is the "optimum" keyboard, how do we weigh things like distance, alternation, same finger use and so on; and 2) what is the algorithm, what is the path to calculate keyboards?

For 1) you can set up your own rules, such as "penalty x for same finger use, penalty Y for use of shift and row 4, and so on. Problem number 2) is harder. How can you be sure that you have the optimal keyboard? I suppose you know the approaches of Carpalx[]/url and [url=http://mathematicalmulticore.wordpress.com/the-keyboard-layout-project/]MTGAP.

This may be a dumb question, but can't you use either carpalx program (written in Perl) or mtgap's program (written in C) as a base, and modify that to your needs? Or do they miss essential aspects?
[/url]

Nobody really deals with dead keys, layers, penalization for using modifiers or sticky keys, Unicode support and you name it.

I originally wanted to simply extend carpalx, but it requires complete reimplementation after deeper inspection. Most of the problem lies in used data structures—nearly everybody works with sequences of characters, not keystrokes.

At least the Cyber Swarm paper takes multi-tap keys (like on old phones) into account.

[PieterGen]

Great. Really interesting  For some reason, the layouts that carpalx produces do not appeal to me, I have some doubts regarding the algorithm - never took the time to dive into it, though. Plus, I know nothing of perl. Today I discoverd that carpalx has calculated a layout optimized for Dutch, but on first sight it seems wrong....  The layouts that mtgap (written in C) produces are more my cup of tea, I think its algorithm is better.

Is there a specific problem with diacritics in Czech and Slovak, compared to the Umlauts in German or Dutch or the accents and tildes in French and Spanish?
 

[davkol]

The problem is that there are many of them and some of them aren't in Latin 1, which is supported by the AdnW optimizer at the very least. The other issue is that there isn't any consistent way to type them.

I mean, if you use Czech QWERTZ, there are two ways to type letters with diacritic marks: press a numrow key (uppercase requires use of Caps Lock; not all letters with diacritic marks have their keys), or use a dead key for the diacritic mark and then type the letter itself. Special symbols (including @) are moved to the AltGr layer, because of the first method. And then the other characters, such as proper „quotation marks“, the standard layout doesn't contain them, thus some hotkeys and Unicode codes are involved.