Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?]

[Ben Bacarisse]

Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet at bsb.me.uk> writes:

> alister <alister.ware at ntlworld.com> writes:
> <snip>
>> <pedant Mode on>
>> the design of qwerty was not to "Slow" the typist bu to ensure that the 
>> hammers for letters commonly used together are spaced widely apart, 
>> reducing the portion of trier travel arc were the could jam.
>> I and E are actually such a pair which is why they are at opposite ends 
>> of the hammer rack (I doubt that is the correct technical term).
>> they are on opposite hands to make typing of them faster.
>> unfortunately as you found it is still possible to jam them if they are 
>> hit almost simultaneously
>> <Pedant Mode Off>
>
> The problem with that theory is that 'er/re' (this is e and r in either
> order) is the 3rd most common pair in English but have been placed
> together.  ou and et (in either order) are the 15th and 22nd most common
> and they are separated by only one hammer position.  On the other hand,
> the QWERTY layout puts jk together, but they almost never appear
> together in English text.

This last part came out muddled.  It's obviously wise to put infrequent
combinations together (like jk), but j and k are both also rare letters
so putting them together represents a wasted opportunity for meeting the
supposed design objective.  Swapping, say, k and r, or splitting jk but
putting e in the middle would surely result in a net gain of "hammer
separation".

-- 
Ben.