Talk:Keyboard layouts: Difference between revisions

From OLPC
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Main page character encoding)
 
(Topic moved from article)
Line 2: Line 2:


The main page doesn't specify character encoding, and it's not unicode/utf 8 (firefox 2.0.0.1 shows a lot of ?'s on the keyboards.) --[[User:Keybounce|Keybounce]] 11:40, 12 February 2007 (EST)
The main page doesn't specify character encoding, and it's not unicode/utf 8 (firefox 2.0.0.1 shows a lot of ?'s on the keyboards.) --[[User:Keybounce|Keybounce]] 11:40, 12 February 2007 (EST)

==Colemak Keyboard==

Dvorak has too many issues to be a mainstream alternative to QWERTY. These problems are explained on the [http://colemak.com/FAQ#What.27s_wrong_with_the_Dvorak_layout.3F Colemak FAQ]. --[[User:Jj05|Jj05]] 13:17, 19 December 2006 (EST)

:I moved this from the article to here. It has nothing to do with the topic of the page, which is existing layouts in Linux. When there is a Colemak keyboard in a mainstream Linux distribution (preferably Red Hat or Debian), we can put its layout here.--[[User:Mokurai|Mokurai]] 09:27, 23 November 2007 (EST)

Revision as of 14:27, 23 November 2007

Main page character encoding

The main page doesn't specify character encoding, and it's not unicode/utf 8 (firefox 2.0.0.1 shows a lot of ?'s on the keyboards.) --Keybounce 11:40, 12 February 2007 (EST)

Colemak Keyboard

Dvorak has too many issues to be a mainstream alternative to QWERTY. These problems are explained on the Colemak FAQ. --Jj05 13:17, 19 December 2006 (EST)

I moved this from the article to here. It has nothing to do with the topic of the page, which is existing layouts in Linux. When there is a Colemak keyboard in a mainstream Linux distribution (preferably Red Hat or Debian), we can put its layout here.--Mokurai 09:27, 23 November 2007 (EST)