Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Fix Belarusian Cyrillic layout & add Łacinka #124

Open
wants to merge 10 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

lomtjjz
Copy link

@lomtjjz lomtjjz commented Nov 29, 2024

Hi. This PR fixes some errors with Belarusian Cyrillic layout and introduces an option for a Latin-based script, (Łacinka).

Changes in Cyrillic/belarusian.yaml:

  • ў: Added to the layout.
  • щ: Removed, as it does not exist in the Belarusian alphabet. Both Xorg and AOSP map ў to this key.
  • є, и, and ї: Removed, as these letters are specific to the Ukrainian alphabet and are not part of Belarusian.

Also I renamed the file to Cyrilic/belarusian_cyrillic.yaml.

Łacinka

@tenextractor
Copy link
Contributor

Sorry, I forgot to include Ў in the layout. But why remove И Ї Є? They are not top level keys, only long press options, and don't cause any problems. Even in the English keyboard you can get letters like Á even though they are not part of the English alphabet.

@lomtjjz
Copy link
Author

lomtjjz commented Nov 30, 2024

"Less is better?"


But yes, you're right. Compatibility across layouts is good... and following this thought, we also need to consider adding щ and ъ

@tenextractor
Copy link
Contributor

Ъ is automatically added in Cyrillic layouts under Ь, so we just need Щ under Ш

@lomtjjz
Copy link
Author

lomtjjz commented Nov 30, 2024

Oh, ok. However, I would argue that placing Щ under Ў could be just as intuitive. Maybe the best solution is to map it under both Ш and Ў

@tenextractor
Copy link
Contributor

Yes, it could be under both

@tenextractor
Copy link
Contributor

tenextractor commented Nov 30, 2024

And about the Latin layout, making it long press based is bad for typing speed, it could be something like this:

ć č ź ž ń ŭ ś š ł
q w e r t y u i o p
a s d f g h j k l
z x c v b n m

This might be too big, but we don't have a proper layer system which could shrink the layout, so this is the best possible layout at the moment.
Once there is a layer system the layout could be like this:

Base layer
q w e r t y u i o p
a s d f g h j k l *
z x c v b n m
(* = switch layer key)

Next layer
q w e r t y ŭ i o p
a ś š f g h j ĺ ł *
ž ź ć č b ń m

@lomtjjz
Copy link
Author

lomtjjz commented Nov 30, 2024

I never saw such a thing done before for Łacinka. It will definitely be confusing for the first timers

@lomtjjz
Copy link
Author

lomtjjz commented Nov 30, 2024

That said, it's not a bad idea. Typing with an extra row really makes it faster when you get used to it. So, how about two layout options: with and without the fourth row?

I think this is how it should look like:

ź ž ś š ć č ŭ ĺ ł ń 
q w e r t y u i o p
a s d f g h j k l
z x c v b n m

@tenextractor
Copy link
Contributor

Yes this is fine, and we can simplify the layout YAML:

name: Belarusian (Latin)
languages: be-Latn
rows:
  - letters: ź ž ś š ć č ŭ ĺ ł ń
  - letters: 
    - q
    - w
    - e
    - r
    - t
    - y
    - ['u', 'ŭ']
    - i
    - o
    - p
  - letters:
    - a
    - ['s', 'ś', 'š']
    - d
    - f
    - g
    - h
    - j
    - k
    - ['l', 'ĺ', 'ł'] 
  - letters:
    - ['z', 'ź', 'ž']
    - x
    - ['c', 'ć', 'č']
    - v
    - b
    - ['n', 'ń']
    - m

@lomtjjz
Copy link
Author

lomtjjz commented Dec 4, 2024

Hi. Are there any further changes needed or is it ready to be merged?

@lomtjjz lomtjjz requested a review from abb128 December 5, 2024 17:50
@lomtjjz
Copy link
Author

lomtjjz commented Dec 11, 2024

Hi. Can you review it once again? @abb128

@lomtjjz
Copy link
Author

lomtjjz commented Dec 20, 2024

Hello again. I fixed the problem mentioned in the latest review. Is there anything else that needs to be addressed before merging?

@lomtjjz
Copy link
Author

lomtjjz commented Jan 7, 2025

@abb128
Copy link
Collaborator

abb128 commented Jan 7, 2025

Sorry for the delay, I'll try to get through the PR backlog this week

@lomtjjz
Copy link
Author

lomtjjz commented Jan 30, 2025

Hi. Could you please make another review?

@lomtjjz
Copy link
Author

lomtjjz commented Feb 7, 2025

@abb128

@lomtjjz
Copy link
Author

lomtjjz commented Feb 23, 2025

Hi. Here is a brief overview of the changes introduced in this PR:

Let me know if there is anything I can do to make it easier for you.

Before merging, I would appreciate discussing a few points. Is there a preferred way to contact you? Email, Discord, Zulip, or perhaps something else?

Awaiting your reply

@tenextractor
Copy link
Contributor

The developer is busy, don't worry, it will be merged eventually.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants