RSTLNE layout is a layout created by “adumb”, using genetic algorithm.
Problems of the RSTLNE Layout
not bad, but this guy wasted a lot of his effort, and seems didn't read up on prior art.
First major flaw: his criterion only count distances. E.g. Using pinky would score the same as using index finger in his algorithm. This makes his whole effort useless. Because counting distances, is the oldest, naive, criterion in creating layouts, done since 2005 using genetic algorithm. (e.g. Capewell layout.)
Second major flaw. His input text is based on academic journals, tons of esoteric jargons that average keyboard users never typed. He should use standard corpus such as Alice in Wonderland , or such improved compilation on children's books so that only words known to average people are considered. Or, use today's journalism (online news sites) or some online forum chatty text. So that, the result reflect practical usage by average people, not academicians.
Third major flaw, is that he counts the distances of keys by considering the literal distances of mechanical type writter design of 100 years ago. For example, the row M is on (the bottom row), happened to have more shifting towards the right, 100 years ago, then the row U is on (the top row), therefore, he considers the letters on top row better than on bottom row. This made the study much less useful, because for example, many Microsoft keyboards deviate from old typewriter design in the distance of row shift. e.g.
- Microsoft Ergonomic Keyboard 2019
- Microsoft Sculpt Ergonomic Keyboard
- Microsoft Surface Book Keyboard
and his study would be completely useless for the category of ergo keyboards that have no row stagger. (critical, since letter layout is fundamentally part of physical keyboard layout design.) e.g.
Keyboard Layout Design 🔠
Keyboard Layouts and Efficiency
Ergonomic keyboard Layouts
Thumb Keyboard Layouts
- Most Efficient Layout?
- Maltron vs Dvorak
- Colemak vs Workman
- Typing Multi Layouts