Could you upgrade the ISO to UK-ISO? Or at the very least make split shift key |\ and key to the left of ISO enter ~#.
Is the <> a thing that many people use? I think I wouldn't buy the numpad + ISO kit in it's current form.
Something more like what GMK Minimal did would be better if you really wanna cut down on the number of keys in that kit: https://mykeyboard.eu/catalogue/gmk-minimal-addon-kit_939/
Heyo!
I like to do it this way as it's the only way to provide a complete ISO layout with only 4 keys. I don't like the approach where you introduce 1-2 1u keys out of an ISO layout that has more than triple that amount to for it to be complete, it looks and feels off IMO.
This is the ISO-US Terminal layout, and even though no one uses it, it provides physical coverage while not duplicating keys (some sets do two pipeslash) or having incomplete layouts.
As for <>, it's probably the single most common 1u ISO key across all layouts, at least to my knowledge, depletedvespene can confirm or deny that for me. 
I hope that explains it! 
I have been summoned.When it comes to keycap sets, almost all start off using the English (USA) national layout, and many have support only for ANSI (remember the English (USA) national layout was written with the ANSI
and ANSISO physical layout variants in mind); fortunately, this has changed and the vertical ("ISO") Enter key is now present most of the time.
To add proper physical support for actual ISO keyboards (not just ANSISO), there are two main
traditions regarding the R4 "extra" alpha: in the
PC style, you simply repeat the
\| key (already present in R2 or R3), while in the
terminal style, a
<> key is added instead.
Both
traditions have advantages and disadvantages:
\| is what Microsoft actually implements,
<> avoids the crappy look of a repeated key
(No Alice users in this thread? Good!);
\| gets to be reused in the English (UK) and Portuguese (Brazil) national layouts;
<> gets to be reused in the Norwegian, Spanish (Spain), Spanish (Latin America), Portuguese (Portugal), Italian and French national layouts
(and this is discounting the versions with a tertiary legend: <>| and <>\). All y'all take a look at
http://www.farah.cl/Keyboardery/A-Visual-Comparison-of-Different-National-Layouts/ and be amazed.
With that said, as it stands now, the keycap set has proper(*) support for English (USA) over ANSI, ANSISO and ISO (terminal style)
(and ISANSI (terminal style) too, but no one cares about that).
In order to
fully support the English (UK) over ISO national layout (current usage, not the "proper standard" — see the comparison diagram in
http://www.farah.cl/Keyboardery/A-Visual-Comparison-of-Different-National-Layouts/#enUK), quite a few keys would need to be added:
R1:
`¬¦ 3£ (in both colors)
4$€ (in both colors);
2" (in the extras kit, in both colors).
R3:
'@ #~R4:
\| AltGrEleven extra keys in total
(note a second `¬¦ is unnecessary, given that alphas and mods have the same color), which is a lot. With some effort and questionable design decisions, this could be trimmed a bit:
- Two keys less if we all choose to turn a blind eye to the tertiary legend in
4$€ (it follows that the '¦' in
`¬¦ should also get the axe, but that doesn't change the key count)
- One key less if the terminal style is replaced with the PC style on the R4 extra alpha.
- One key less if the AltGr key is omitted (EW, don't do that!).
Lewisflude is suggesting going with "partial British" ISO support, which consists of replacing R4
<> with R4
\| and adding R3
#~, for the grand total of just one more key.
Emir comments that R4
<> is far more common than R4
\| across all layouts, which IS true,
but... it is also true that only one national layout (English (USA)) is being supported in this set, with this discussion being about completing support for a second one (English (UK)).
What to do? It's up to the runner, of course, but... how about adding TWO keys (R4
\| and R3
#~) to the numiso kit? This would expand its support to English (USA) terminal style, English (USA) PC style and the "partial" English (UK) layout. Both keycaps are common, so the cost of extra molds wouldn't be an issue, and the extra total cost for the kit should be negligible.
HTH!
(*) It should be
<>, not
<>|, but Emir likes it like that, and since we're talking about traditions here, I can't really tell him "Follow the spec, dammit!".
(**) Perhaps it should be
<>♥ instead of
<>|, because ISO IS LOVE, ISO IS LIFE.
