Embodiments of the present disclosure relate to methods to type phonetic alphabets without the need for a timer and disable key because of the availability of more keys due to the novel programming methods disclosed herein. The number of keys available for typing has been increased more than those described in previous patents. The typist can now also use more than one typing method at the same time. The methods disclosed herein drastically increase the power to type Ethiopic with one and two keystrokes each from Ethiopic layout distributed on the default, shifted and command keys and the numeric pad. The present disclosure allows for varieties of keyboard layouts and novel modifications of these methods including the reverse. Numerous novel methods of Ethiopic documentations applicable to Unicode language glyphs also are described. Different layouts can also be presented separately or together. The major novelty is the display and settlement of a default glyph with a keystroke or two each and its subsequent modification with vowels without affecting the default settlement. A glyph typed with two or more keystrokes can revert to the defaults by striking the vowel.
Ethiopic is one of the oldest alphabets in the world that existed as “” and “” series. It has managed to use the printing press since 1513. With the advent of the computer technology Dr. Aberra Molla started working on Ethiopic in 1982 and computerized it using an app released in 1983 and advanced it. The patented novel Ethiopic typing methods have continued to be improved and the novel invention involving even the use of “tab” for typing has been introduced by him.
It should be noted that the Amharic typewriter and its computerized versions are fake character parts distributed on a single ASCII table of less than 100 spots or to be scrambled out of such pieces and are not Ethiopic. It is like typing the 26 English alphabets out of pieces distributed on the 10 number keys.
Ethiopic is the stand-alone glyph similar to the English alphabet except that their numbers are more than 400 in use by the printing press for hundreds of years. It is the Ethiopic computerized by the doctor that became Unicode's Ethiopic.
Ethiopic typing has continued to be a problem because its typing method was tied to the Latin alphabet keyboard. As a result, the about 500 Ethiopic character set has continued to run into problems because of its dependence on the QWERTY type and similar keyboard with 101 keys. While the typing of Ethiopic with one and two keystrokes across technologies from computers to smartphones has been achieved, there are rooms for improvement. It should be noted that the typing of Ethiopic with one and two keystrokes covers varieties of keyboards and moving the layouts around or utilizing more keystrokes are included. It is worth noting that Molla was the first to use character sets in excess of the Latin set for the first time.
One other feature introduced by Molla with computerization of Ethiopic is its layout as there was none before. Initially the Amharic typewriter layout was adapted by assigning the most commonly used varieties to a key. The typewriter layout came from one the inventor's brother, Getachew, learned from the Ethiopian Embassy in Washington D.C. in 1983. An unpublished material by Mattew Lindia (2018) describes Dr. Molla's contributions and the huge differences between the Amharic typewriter and Ethiopic.
In spite of these developments, many have continued to use Ethiopic typing methods with varieties of problems. For instance, one renamed EthioWord's two-keystroke method (
While some systems provide for touching a key that brings up an incomplete and undocumented glyphs showing “” when “” is struck that supposedly picks a “” on selecting it from the popup list while the manual claims the typing of a default glyph with a single stroke. This is similar to another app, with similar problems. In spite of typing the “”, it has not been settled even with mouse clicks. Even the English accent typing method of scooting to an accented glyph is a two-key system and that was not adaptable for the computer version. While the Ethiopic is broken down to orders, the accented method is for classes showing up in the cells and the current claim include documentation by those methods. The computer and the virtual keyboards are similar.
The current method is improvement over the one and two keystrokes and also addition of third keystrokes as novel keyboarding. This is because the use of four and more keystrokes has continued to also be a problem and thus require discouragement. Typing of Ethiopic glyphs with one or two keystrokes is described in U.S. Pat. No. 10,133,362 to Molla irrespective of the methods of rendering the Ethiopic. Some have also continued to base the typing on English spelling and examples are those such as Microsoft, SIL, Keyman and Google. For instance, SIL types “” with five or six keystrokes because Ethiopic glyphs are typed as words with different spellings. Historically Dr. Molla as a pioneer of Ethiopic computerization considered the potential users in assignment of the keys. Languages with less numbers of users, and thus keystrokes, were assigned to the periphery while glyphs like the “v” (
Molla started out with two keyboard layouts in the 80's and one was the Amharic typewriter type without the ligation to support those who were used to it. The other configuration was the QWERTY type where similar Latin sounds were associated with the Amharic keys. The typewriter was arbitrary and discontinued after support for a decade and the QWERTY keyboard was standardized at the request of the consumers. The advantage of the QWERTY keyboard is because the Latin alphabet and Ethiopic share most of the key sounds. For instance, the “ASDFGHJKL” share the same Ethiopic “” phonemes making typing simple. An example of typing Amharic in English from a cellphone is incorporated as a claim here is available (
The inventor started working on Ethiopic in 1982 and an app he computerized Ethiopic with was released in 1983 and he later applied for a U.S.A. patent. He was encouraged to patent his methods in Ethiopia by USPTO. Unfortunately, he could not get patents for his methods because Ethiopia did not have patent laws at the time. He was advised to release the applications on the promise that the issue would be looked into in the future by the Ethiopian government. In 1991 the military government was replaced by a tribal one that was hostile to Amharic and refused to give the patent to the inventor. This resulted with the appearance of numerous plagiarists and the inventor started with improved methods switching priority to the USA and subsequently received four Ethiopic U.S.A. patents and three Ethiopian patents.
In spite of the patents being for the typing methods, some have recently started with the Ethiopic sorting order as a default and Molla does not recommend it and has presented it for the sake of the claims, as it adds unnecessary cost. His methods allow the use of the English keyboard for Ethiopic and it even works in Notepad. The principles described for Windows works in smartphones and other gadgets with virtual, on-screen and other keyboards. Making the Ethiopic keyboard layout similar to that of Latin has helped to easily adapt and modify current technologies. The patent covers various layouts.
In the past people have used jailbreaking and simulation programs instead of paying royalties or buying software from the inventor. These and similar approaches are for varieties of patented and non-patented methods that can be utilized in Ethiopic and examples are speech, optical character recognition, Swiftkey, simulation in different operation systems, language operation systems, jailbreaking, layouts, conversions, onscreen keyboard, autocorrection, spell checker and more such as the virtual keyboard Google has presented. The claim by the inventor thus includes such methods where applicable. Examples of other instances are the use of a second keystrokes such as the space instead of the apostrophe key and removing the space if there is a need to type another glyph next to it. Such tricks have been used as a way to go around the patent at the expense of the keystrokes and scientific honesty. All these are now claimed to stop such problems. For instance, Ethiopic is the best live phonetic alphabet and can be improved to cover all possible phenomes with a glyph each and use speech as standalone app or supplement to type in numerous languages of the world. The need for these claims is because some are using false claims of the fake typewriter glyphs as Ethiopic and present such inefficient methods to get to Ethiopic based on false stories. Others have failed to grasp the science behind the patents and fraud with undocumented materials includes Amharic Wikipedia. Amharic books have been typed without an Ethiopic period and whole books are not even single sentences.
One of the reasons for this application is to put an end to false claims by many who have continued to drag Ethiopic backward without documenting Ethiopic. Numerous false methods have also been used for further studies taking down newer applications with them. The current invention is to incorporate the various incomplete attempts as a scientifically sound standard. In the past the inventor has shown that the Ethiopic “” series need more keys while those like the “v” key do not have to be wasted on less used “” orders. What is important is to create a system to spell out each and every Ethiopic glyph with a separate spelling with the least number of keystrokes. The novel invention fulfills those with one and two keystrokes while focusing on the keys around the “F” and “J” home keys. The need for more vowels (“a” and the third shift “tab”) mentioned in the previous patent has been put to different uses in the current inventions and applications. Characters that were displaced by the vowels and shown at the bottom row have been moved to the top row and replaced by the glyphs that share keys. The use of the previous layouts in the current invention has not been abandoned. For instance, the command keys can be used as vowels or any glyphs. Different use of the “tab” key has been expanded to other command keys while the symbols on the numeric pad as well as the numbers have also been utilized for the novel Ethiopic numerals. Even the arrow keys are now typing tools without abandoning previous methods. It should be noted the current novel methods are not similar to the lining up of accented Latin vowels which are actually two-keystroke incomplete methods when used with Geez. This is because a default system can't type an English glyph and an Ethiopic with a keystroke each in methods other than described in the patents by Molla before and now. An example of current programing is where “&c” is for the “left ctrl”.
The keyboards are standardized such that all language character sets are built around Amharic that includes the Geez language. As the language sets are incorporated, they should not interfere with previous Ethiopic languages. It may be better to increase the keystrokes to three rather than use the reverse typing with two.
An improved Ethiopic typing system where defaults are typed with one and the rest with a maximum of two and/or three keystrokes to render and settle a glyph is described. The method is uniform across platforms and operating systems that vary from usages in computers, smartphones, laptops and the like. It also applies similarly in keyboards such as QWERTY, Hele (Uλ) or others layouts in computers, smartphones and the like including abbreviated, virtual, custom or on-screen. Rendering can be achieved through the use of fingers as well as methods that mimic it and vary from mouse clicks to external keyboards. More than one typing methods and layouts can be used from a keyboard and timeout and disable keys are optional. The purpose is to incorporate Ethiopic in any application that allow the usage of the font or typeface and include coding key sequences that may or may not result in the appearances of all on the screen. A method of progressive typing that breaks up an Ethiopic glyph to its default forms or non-combination characters is included. In one method a character is rendered with one or more keystrokes such that the glyph is settled with second activity involving programming of the sequences. In another the activities are performed in the reverse directions with the same end results. In a third method a glyph rendered with two or more keystrokes is broken down to two or its settled components with a third or more keystroke. In a fourth novelty two of the same or different glyphs are rendered and settled with two keystrokes as in the use of the shifted glyphs or those rendered with the accompanying command keys. Glyphs rendered with two or more keystrokes are also rendered and settled with non-printable glyphs just like the single keystroke varieties. There is thus no need to utilize more than three keystrokes to type and render Ethiopic and similar number of glyphs. Long holds and appearance of glyphs in a row showing the glyphs or just highlighting the choices can also be optional. The pint here is to incorporate what others have tried and current them with the new features.
The invention describes novel methods of expanding the keyboard for many languages and the breakthrough is really worth celebrating. The invention expands on the number of glyphs that can be typed by improving the functionality of the keys. More important than that the novel method eliminates the gimmicks others have utilized to render and settle Ethiopic without scientifically sound solutions. The novel method has allowed to expand keyboarding around the “F” and “J” home keys in computers.
The novel invention is about special type of programing where the use of the command keys and arrows expand the keyboard keys available for the purpose of typing Ethiopic and other Unicode glyphs. In the past the tab key was used as a second keystroke and that added the number of new keys by as many as the number of keys on the keyboard.
In the past and as described in U.S. Pat. No. 9,000,957 a total of 14 glyphs were rendered from two keys such as “a” and “e”. In the current invention some of the features are avoided because of previous commitment and to avoid confusion. For instance, the combined use of the left ctrl and alt keys disable the GeezEdit app and not used here without voiding the claims. In the past the tab key was also used as a standalone optional third shift key in the GeezEdit and EthioSuite apps. (“fn Z” could be used to type “”, “alt Z” for “”, etc. while changing to another layout is just by moving the glyphs and vowels around.) In the current Ethiopic typing system named “Werqie” the command keys are utilized in many ways other than solitary and default keys. As a result, it is also possible to now move the keys dedicated to the QWERTY keyboard to different glyphs giving priority to methods Ethiopic needs. With due respect to Ethiopians who used Molla's keyboard for the ABSHA system, the new one could appear as a second, independent or superimposed system. Actually, the inventor wants the novel Ethiopic Werkie to be the standard. Over the years the inventor digitized Ethiopic starting out in 1982 and two types of major programs were released. One group was dedicated Ethiopic publishers with superimposed English while the others were memory resident apps to work in various English apps. The biggest challenges were to limit the number of characters around the “F” and “J” keys for fast typing on computers. The challenge involving virtual keyboards like those of smartphones is limiting the keys to about a dozen glyphs in a row. The layouts have remained close to older methods to maintain uniformity in all gadgets without ignoring or excluding others. Feature available were utilized in the Ethiopic systems and examples are like selecting a glyph with a mouse from a set or screen to modifying speech and character recognition apps and the like to fit the Ethiopic systems. All apps that allow fonts were in use and the limitation was the knowledge of the user. Apps such as EthioSuite are to build Ethiopic features not available in the Latin and current systems without excluding them. Ethiopic computerization has remained a serious problem because the computer was built on the needs of the English Latin alphabet. By 1982 only the ASCII keyboard with 128 potential spots were available. This was enough to simulate the Amharic typewriter patented earlier by Engineer Ayana Birru and Alem Work and Molla was not interested in those as they were not Ethiopic and were character parts assembled from different pieces to look like Amharic. The doctor was into the ancient real Ethiopic that was in use for thousands of years. In 1983 Grum got hold of a demo disk of a software by the name of MegaWriter that seemed to fulfill what the doctor wanted which were primarily an application that would allow making Ethiopic fonts and has also the capability to handle more than one font. MegaWriter allowed the use of different languages such as Arabic and Hebrew that needed only one ASCII sets each to be selected through the function keys. Large and small fonts were selected though other function keys. A review of this application is available at InfoWorld Vol 5, No 47 of Nov. 21, 1983 page 68.
Molla started by trying out this and other applications in computer shops (
The principle behind computerizing Ethiopic with this method is to break up the Ethiopic into orders and permit their appearance through the function keys while the Ethiopic glyphs were entered on second keystroke of the keyboard keys. A simple example is to render “bu” with “F2” and “b” keys as in ModEth. Weyanie in Ethiopia by 1991 refused to give the inventor's patent as promised by the military government it overthrew it with the help of the US government.
Fast forward, Ethiopic computerization has been described at Ethiopian review of January 1991, and September 1995. Ethiophonetics was presented in Microsoft Word as published in Ethiopian Review in 1995. Then typing was improved though regressive and progressive timeouts as described in newer patents to Molla. In the meantime, two groups of copycats appeared. One presented the Amharic typewriter version in 1986 and later started calling it Ethiopic falsely. This individual was not the only one to computerize the typewriter while he was the first fake legend of digitized Ethiopic. Another one who was familiar with ModEth sold with another name for English and presented it as something new in 1988 and became a second fake legend. The current invention is a follow up and solves why a keystroke does not render and settle an Ethiopic glyph. The main reason is because when one shares the keyboard with English, the second font requires a second process to settle the non-English glyph. Using the accented Latin glyphs in the extended ASCII is not the same with it Molla's explanation as in
Unlike Molla's patented methods where timing was introduced as a differentiating factor these other methods embraced by Keyman and others have no timing factor. As a result, the use of vowel keys is limited and different when the key is used as a character. On the other hand, assigning keys such as “aeiou” to the Ethiopic “” glyphs resulted in the loss of keys creating shortages. These shortages forced the need to double the function of the vowel and other keys to more than one Ethiopic glyph. An example is “t” for “” and “T” for “”.
The current invention can be utilized by varieties of language glyphs. These vary from those such as Latin to the expanded international phonetic alphabet and those that use it in transliterations. Many African languages can receive their own Geez sets and languages such as N'ko now have Ethiopic tonal marks (
A fifth worth mentioning is detraction of Ethiopic documentation by numerous entities for their own purposes. These vary from the TPLF government that refused to give Ethiopian patents to Molla as earlier promised by the Derg government as well as self-promoting Ethiopian copycats who falsely call themselves Ethiopic legends. Many lacked the intelligence to grasp the points behind the patents and they include late-comers such as Google and numerous Ethiopians. Others such as Wikipedia were busy undermining Ethiopic by allowing deletion of documents such as references #31 and #32 to Ethiopic patents. Latecomers to such gimmicks include Kekros system where the typing of an Ethiopic glyph with a keystroke is claimed as shown in
A practical example is to add the shift key and increase the number of keys rendered. For instance, “tab” “[” renders “” if the “[” key is to render the Amharic “”. “[” “tab” renders “” while “shift [” or “{” renders “”. “” can be rendered by “[” and “left ctrl” or “[” and “1”. The use of “tab” and “{” is discouraged to avoid confusion without giving up on the novelty claim. The “left ctrl” and “[” can type “”, “fn [” to type “”, etc. These are new methods used as the character sets increase while adding efficiency to the small sets such as Amharic. The “” can also be typed with the right “ctrl” key and “[” to add efficiency by dedicating one hand for each half of the keyboard.
In the numeric row, the Amharic can be typed using these keys as second keystrokes. The number “6” don't even have to be utilized as a default keystroke. This is because the defaults are typed with a keystroke each and there is no need to utilize another keystroke to settle it. This equally apply when shift or command keys are superimposed. If necessary, the “Apostrophe” key is always available for this purpose too. There is thus no need for more than three keystrokes to type any Ethiopic glyph. An example is the use of the “[” to type “” and “[′” or “[” and “6” can optionally settle it. Thus “{” renders while “{′” settles it. The “[right fn” can then be used for “”. “” can be typed with “tab [” or “[9” too. The patterns can be standardized for simplicity and brevity. On the other hand, “[v” renders “” and “{v” renders “” and “[V” can render “”. Typing in the reverse as in typing “” with “v[” or “v{” is possible. However, this could interfere with prior keystrokes and the best option may be to change the “” typing to “[1”.
There is thus no need to use more than three keystrokes as in typing “” with “V{” and this is a new claim. While these novel methods allow variety of typing methods, some are not utilized to avoid confusion. An example is not typing “” with “at” as it interferes with the default typing while “At” or “aT” are options. “[1” or “[!” can type “”. Similarly, in the Hele layout “Shift 1 q” can be used to type “”. The inventor's choice is to stick to the Qwerty layout such that the default is typed with a keystroke each, while the shift is used for the second layer, the numbers for the third and the command keys for the fourth. This is because the third and the fourth are for minority user-languages. The pattern can be broken down to better keyboarding if the user-languages need simpler ones of their own languages. This is based on the need and principle such as “” and “” have their own 13 and 8 vowel forms individually represented for simple typing. An issue to mind in the standardization of the Ethiopic keyboard is the fact than other Ethiopic-user languages have to be considered when one is set for Amharic keyboard. This is because other keyboards have to be added on the Amharic without changing the Amharic typing methods or keys. For instance, the middle numbers “45678” can be used for the “” Amharic to make typing simple. This is unacceptable unless this keyboarding can be used for other Ethiopic alphabets too.
Another novel approach is to type “”, “”, “”, “” and “” with “vq”, “iq”, “aq”, “eq” and “uq” with two keystrokes each. These can also be typed with “9”, “0”, “8”, “−” and “=” or “1”, “3”, “4”, “5” and “6” and/or “7”, “9”, “0”, “−” and “=”. The “” can also be typed with “2” and “7” to cut on the spread. Another option is to type them with the ctrl, fn, start, left alt, right alt, right fn and right ctrl keys or their reverse for the above or just some vowels. These seven keys can also be utilized as regular vowels bidirectionally. It is also possible to use two of these at a time or break them up between each half of the keyboard to distribute the burden between the fingers of both hands. These are just examples and not limiting. In one of these methods typing “q” is for “” while “qv” is for “” and “vq” types “”. “” is typed with “qvq” while “vvq” types “” and it is preferred over “vq” to avoid interference from suspended typing. Note that “” can also be typed with “wke”, etc.
In the current invention as well as the previous ones by Molla, the whole Ethiopic was considered though the major concern has remained that of Amharic. The current invention solves a few major issues. The primary one is because Ethiopic can be typed with one and two keystrokes only and even more efficiently due to the current invention. Hopefully this would stop false claims by others that the defaults are rendered and settled with a keystroke each. This false information also includes the typing claim of a glyph with two keystrokes that includes the “shift” key. The dangerous issue at hand is because the document has really not been documented and people continue to waste their times. As a result, it is important to shame even large corporations for being part of this sham. For instance, SIL claims that the default form is the 6th order (and one does not have to type the “−” key). The so-called Ethiopic keyboards by numerous companies require scrutiny. With these fake starts they have continued to add even more fictional keyboards dragging the Ethiopic backwards.
Default keystrokes and two keystrokes render and settle a glyph as describe in patents granted to Molla. Optionally adding a mouse click, a space bar after the character or the word or processes such as saving a document may settle such glyphs. This is a new claim because it is not two keystrokes. Without these features the Ethiopic remains undocumented and an example is at Amharic Wikipedia that uses SERA. At Amharic Wiki opening a document to edit even changes the default 6th order glyphs at the end of a word to its vowel form on typing a vowel next to it. This is because the glyph has never been settled initially. The glyph changes from the default to its vowel form with a keystroke because it was never settled in the first place. One can't have a glyph rendered with one or two keystrokes and also change it at the same time other than by methods invented by Molla. In reality no glyph is rendered and settled with one and two keystrokes and the same pattern is followed as the number of keystrokes is increased to three, four and more. The novel Ethiopic numerals can be typed preferably with default keystrokes each from the numeric keypad or with one or two keystrokes each elsewhere.
This invention's difference from the use of the ASCII system as in ModEth and EthioWord has been mentioned above. In ModEth each order was assigned to the function key while the default EA typing font was introduced with EthioWord. In GeezEdit the tab key was introduced as an additional first order key vowel and the second unassigned “a” key in FIG. 32 was introduced in U.S. Pat. No. 10,133,362. The same figure has been modified and reprinted as
These assignment of giving separate keys for the eight orders by adding the “tab” and an “a” key other than the “” key (FIG. 73 from U.S. Pat. No. 10,133,362 has recently been copied to their assignment in the fake, distorted and multiple keystroke SERA and other systems by assigning them to the “a” “v” and “x” keys.
In the U.S. Pat. No. 10,133,362 patent
These key assignments are examples and not limiting. Ethiopic was clearly and scientifically documented in the inventions by Molla. The current invention is a new solution to problems associated with creation of the Unicode system leaving the keyboard dedicated to ASCII and extended ASCII. The issue thus involves the alphabets of the world and the novelty is a panacea for all. One proof for the inventor's theory come from the fact that both the regular number keys and those of the numeric pad used the same font while the Ethiopic ones require more. This novel keyboarding examples are shown in
The novel claims above can be repeated in virtual abbreviated or unabbreviated keyboards, in virtual and on-screen and related clickable keyboards. The desktop as well as the virtual keyboards can be the same especially in on-screen keyboards. However, every process is not necessarily the same as tin he case of the smartphone a long press of the “t” key can produce “” while “” can be rendered by one of the command keys and “t”.
In another innovation the old method of breaking up the Ethiopic into 8, 12, 13 and more fonts is presented as in the accented varieties of the “a” vowel and one selected on second press of the number keys and the minus and plus keys are enough with or without showing the glyphs. Another feature is the availability of these and more novelty in EthioSuite for Ethiopic and English. “” can be typed many ways.
Another feature is the availability of the glyphs of the extended characters such as “” and “ã” to represent glyphs especially on virtual keyboards. This expands the keys available for programming without showing them on the screens as shown in
It is also possible to remotely use the regular or modified keyboards at Ethiopic.com page as in
In the past distribution of the Ethiopic glyphs on the computer keys was similar to that of the English with exception of some keys. Characters such as “” and “” were assigned to the “[” and “]” keys because of the small number of Amharic words that use them. Keys such as “−”, “+” and “\” were reserved for minority user languages, such as Oromiffa (), Tigrigna () and Agew/Bilen () respectively and not used by Amharic.
The current invention allows the typing of the about 500 Ethiopic glyphs with one or two keystrokes each. It is theoretically possible to type a glyph with a keystroke each using most of the available keys including the function keys on the computer. All can be typed with additional second keystrokes. If one is interested in focusing on the keyboard around the “F” and “J” home keys, a third keystroke can be introduced while four or more keystrokes are unnecessary. However, it is possible to balance the spread of hardware computer keyboards by using the keys close to the center while virtual keyboards can utilize similar keyboards for a different reason. These are shown in the first 48 figures. The problem with the computer hardware keys is because they are too far apart while those of smartphones is because they are too close to each other. Switching between landscape and portrait views where possible makes it simple to take advantage of this novel invention and focus on the basic science to enhance it with the wishes of all the potential users of Ethiopic. Even older layouts as shown in
Assignments of the glyphs to the keys have been described in earlier patents. The important current novelty is the potential of assigning two key combinations while also allowing bidirectional typing in computer hardware and virtual keyboards such as those of smartphones. Each of the following keys −, =, L ctrl, L fn, start, L ctrl, R alt, R fn, R ctrl L Arrow, Down Arrow, Up Arrow, R Arrow, numeric pad numbers and more can also be used bidirectionally with other programmable keys to generate glyphs in excess of what Ethiopic needs. This does not mean the use of three or more keys struck simultaneously or consecutively are excluded.
Typing with the QWERTY keyboard is close to the versions described in previous patents. In one configuration the “ASDF” keys are still assigned to the “” orders while “JKL:” was assigned to the “” keys. The previous “” was changed because the “” was moved to the shifted “t” position. The claim in the virtual keyboards include 10 keys per row though this can be reduced or increased. An example of the best layout is
In the past apps such as Keyman, Lexilogos and Hagerigna and similar software show the glyphs on striking a key or two or applying a mouse click while they are actually not settled as described in U.S. Pat. No. 9,000,957 to Molla. The evidence for these is the necessity that striking an “e” key shows an “” glyph without settling it. Settling the “” requires the addition of a space to render it. Those who encourage this approach have been at it for a long time cheating the Ethiopic users by falsely claiming that a glyph is rendered with a keystroke. Further evidence comes from trying to type “” with two keystrokes as that can't be written because the double strike is supposed to type the vowel form of the fourth order glyph or “”.
Typing the two “” glyphs requires the addition of a space between them requiring a total of six keystrokes. Striking the “e” key forces the appearance of an Ethiopic “” glyph that in reality has not been settled. This is because striking another “e” does not type another Ethiopic “” glyph and instead brings up a single third character because the combination is for typing a new glyph such as “”. It is possible to type “” by first typing the first “” with an “e” keystroke and add a space with a space bar to settle it. These two keystrokes are then followed by a backspace key to remove the space with a third keystroke to be followed by the second “” with a fourth keystroke. Unfortunately, this is just half the job as only the first “” was settled. It takes two more keystrokes, another space bar and backspace, totaling six keystrokes to settle the “”. It is also possible to apply the delete key instead of the backspace in these processes to remove the spaces. The current novelty is to eliminate applying spaces, backspaces and delete keys or another process that slow down typing when the typist is supposed to concentrate on typing only. In those case where the vowel is not followed by another vowel, the user is cheated to move on to another glyph after the vowel as if it was typed with a keystroke. Unfortunately, all the glyphs typed these ways were never settled and thus not documented. This is because the first “” was not settled whether followed by a vowel or non-vowel glyph. For the same reason the single glyphs rendered with a keystroke each were never settled. Ignorance of this fact by the public has encouraged copycat authors of such methods to undermine Ethiopic. A system to represent Ethiopic with ASCII abbreviated as SERA to represent Ethiopian script with Latin and key entry scheme has remained a disaster since 1994. SERA falsely claims a Latin representation method as a key entry or a typing tool where the defaults are typed with a keystroke. This fiction has been taken for granted by the gullible and has become the typing tool of numerous apps such as Keyman and Amharic Wikipedia. As a result, people have been wasting their times. In the current invented method, the “” is rendered and settled with a keystroke with a system different from what has been described in U.S. Pat. No. 10,133,362 and an Ethiopian patent.
In a different typing method by these other troublesome methods, it is possible to type the “” and then go between them with a third step involving the mouse. This can be followed by a space bar fourth keystroke and a backspace or deleted fifth keystroke. A sixth step involves the right arrow to get ahead of the second “”. Unfortunately, even seeing the “” does not mean both are typed as only the first one was done and the second one is in a limbo. Typing the “” thus requires many keystrokes. Similarly, even seeing an “” does not mean they were documented unless the numerous steps were involved. Yet the spelling of the “” is to type a different glyph such as “” by these other apps. These issues also affect glyphs typed with three or more keystrokes by their methods.
In reality this error involves glyphs other than the vowels and Ethiopians have been coned to falsely read untyped documents. To make things worse, they are using arrows, backspace and/or delete keys and pretend they are typing Ethiopic like English. It is unfortunate that all these are going on while Molla computerized Ethiopic with two keystrokes each in the eighties (ModEth) and introduced Ethiopic to Windows (EthioWord as in
In English one types an “e” with a keystroke and an “ee” with two keystrokes. One focuses on typing instead of wasting their times for decades.
At Lexilogos “” was supposed to be typed with “tzta” or by mouse clicks. The word can't be typed because the spelling to type “” is “tz” and the “” word can't with “tz”. These are not the only Amharic words that can't be typed. This patent application is thus also a wakeup call to end the stupidity that has been around for over a decade. An app that can't even type Amharic is of no use for other Ethiopic-user languages because they have more glyphs.
At Hagerigna, the ModEth system by Molla was brought in as something new for the gullible. Striking a “q” brings up the default “” followed by an incomplete list of the orders on the accent row. The trick is to accept the “” as default or switch to its vowel form by selecting one of the vowel varieties with finger tapping. As in the examples above the default glyph was there but never settled. One can switch this unwritten glyph with another one provided a space has not been added. There is no description for a need to apply something to settle it, though some are using selecting another second key to settle it and the method is now claimed because it is described here. Furthermore, scooting through the vowels is a waste of time even for English. The purpose of the keyboard is to type without looking at the keys and there is no need for the user to see the hundreds of the glyphs other than for the purpose of teaching the alphabet to children The Hagerigna hunt, scoot and peck Amharic typing requires too much finger movement and the typist is forced to look for each glyph and slowed down. It also requires the use of keystrokes such as shift keys for a large number of characters especially in virtual keyboarding. The method that started out by copying Latin accent vowel typing has been expanded to cover the whole Ethiopic without typing it and one of the purposes of this patent is to stop the deception. In the Kekros systems incomplete, different and non-documenting methods are presented as the best in spite of patents and continue to be an insult on the intelligence of people. A first keystroke brings up the vowel choices while the second types the choice and claiming the typing of the sixth order with a keystroke is a lie as the sixth order glyph is there on the list to be picked up by a following keystroke or mouse click. The Latin alphabet is not typed with mouse clicks while some Ethiopic users seem to have missed the basics (
In the Hagerigna keyboard, if after the “” typing with “q” one adds a space and type another glyph, say “” with “w” and then remove the space and select one of the “w” orders, that changes the unwritten “” to the chosen “” variety and the joke continues because none were really typed. The “” would be changed to “” for selecting “” and the process continues. Typing “j” after selecting “” and then “” would change the “” to “” because that too was never typed. So, what started with an unwritten “” has gone through untyped “” and ended up with an undocumented “” all in the first starting spot. Now newer copycats are picking up the bad habits. An example is at https://translator.abyssinica.com/ where an unsettled sixth order glyph is changed by adding a vowel next to it. One of the novelties of the current invention is to stop fake documentation whether done deliberately or out of ignorance. As described above the novel method does not need introduction of space or mouse clicks or other processes. However, the current claim includes adding a space and then bringing the next curser next to the glyph with finger typing or mouse click to settle a glyph. This is because these other people did not add a space after every glyph and cheated with some only because they did not understand the purpose. Thus, the claim includes any method that corrects these errors for otherwise people would not have woken up to correct them without the current invention. This is also because the purpose of the English keyboard is to type two glyphs next to each other and not to change the first one with another. These principles thus apply to utilization of various computerized systems as long as the default language is not Latin and associated with the default one and two keystrokes of the alphabet. In the previous granted patents to Molla the glyphs were forced to appear and settle within a timeout (9,000,957) or at zero time (10,133,362). With the current invention, which is an improvement, the Unicode glyph is settled with second processes such as adding an invisible second keystroke. This also applies to the use of a third process to settle glyphs rendered with two keystrokes such as those generated with shifted keystrokes. In the current invention this may also apply to glyphs generated by using the command and related keys when utilized to generate a glyph with two or more keystrokes. Without the current invention a glyph associated with the default ASCII cannot be utilized for any other Unicode glyph without something similar to what is claimed.
Unlike Molla's method where timing was introduced as a factor to differentiate the appearance of one or two glyphs as a result of one and two keystrokes, the SERA group resorted to the inventors earlier two keystrokes method while falsely claiming that the default Ethiopic glyphs were typed with a keystroke each. This was further compounded by creating shortage of keys by assigning the Latin symbol keys to Ethiopic symbols. Attempt to rely on English spelling to type Ge′ez was unsuccessful and the newer versions use pluses and hash tags. An abandoned two-keystroke patent application is available at US20130057478A1—Ethiopic computer keyboard The current novel methods are numerous to list as claims and only some examples are shown. A few examples are as follows mainly because many are falsely claiming that a default Ethiopic glyph is typed with a keystroke each. This false narrative can be proven wrong using words such as “”, “” and “”. The novel approach of typing an Ethiopic glyph followed by an independent vowel that has remained a problem is now resolved with this invention. The current invention solved this problem with numerous novel solutions. “T” or “tv” types “” and “Tv” or “vt” or “vT” is for “” while “Ta” or “at” is for “”. Each typed glyph is settled and thus documented. Clicking on the “t” or typing it with a finger shows and settles the “”. It is not as in these other systems where one sees the glyph that is undocumented. Striking the “v” key with the curser next to the “” removes the “” and replace it with a settled “” glyph. This Werkie Ethiopic writing system is similar to typing the 26 English alphabet except that the Ethiopic is documented as in English or Molla's other methods in more efficient novel methods. While the typing looks like English, there is a lot more going on in the background and its look like the Latin is only on the visibilities of the glyphs. This is typing and settling of an Ethiopic glyph with a single keystroke each.
The typing of “” and “” from the “T” key was to limit the number of keys at the expense of more keystrokes and Ethiopic typing required four or more keystrokes. The current invention solves these problems with one and two keystrokes with options and choices with no more than three. Typing of “” with just an “a” keystroke and settling it is possible through programming alone by using “a′” in the program than through the keyboard alone.
Another part of a similar claim is that a glyph can be type and settled similarly when the shift key is superimposed to type a glyph or two glyphs are involved in typing one. This claim involves two defaults or the same glyph as well as shifted glyphs. For the sake of a claim even three keystrokes can type and settle an Ethiopic character and the third is often the Shift key. The two keys could also be the commands. To go along with the invention the simplest keyboarding can be allocated to Amharic as in the typing of “” with “zv” or “Z” while “” can be typed with “Zv”. “zV” could be for “” and “z2” or “ZU” for “”. The four-keystroke method is not utilized by the Werkie system without abandoning the claim, so “” can be rendered by “z” and the “Left fn” keys or with one of the command or arrow keys as first or second keystroke. “z” and numeric pad “2” is also a possibility.
Ethiopic documentation has also faced another major and independent hurdle other than the fake ones described above and solved by the inventor now. This also is a programming method to solve real problems. In these other erroneous methods, the vowel keys were often dedicated vowels representing a glyph while also acting as vowel keys requiring toggling without settling them due to the problems described above. There is no need for toggling.
Another problem with SERA and related software is not only involving the vowel keys as described above, but other syllables too. It also involves the non-vowel Ethiopic glyphs typed with one and more keystrokes. One can't have a glyph and also change it (by methods other than those of Molla). It is like having a cake and eating it too. Thus, a standalone glyph generated with one or more keystrokes not modified by a vowel remains undocumented. It is because the “” was not settled that it can be changed to a “” by “” or the “e” key. An unsettled “” can be changed to an unsettled “” with more than one keystroke. It should be noted that this principle has been described in previous patents by Molla. The point here is to point out that the “” was never settled and thus not documented in the SERA system.
A third serious problem involves the need to maintain the default followed by a vowel character. An example is as in the above “” to be followed by an “e” or “” keystroke since the “e” changes the “” to “”. To avoid the change the typist has to introduce a space to render and settle the “”. The need for introduction of a space next to every non-vowel glyph was never fully described and understood. This is because the “” that needed a space to be documented alone also needs to be followed by a vowel to be documented. Thus, a glyph that needed a space or a vowel to settle it also needs a space when followed by a non-vowel glyph. Unfortunately, a glyph followed by a non-vowel won't be settled by the second glyph as the second one was never settled. The rendering of an Ethiopic glyph with two keystrokes each was described by the inventor in his patent applications to the US and Ethiopia in the 80's and also here. The rendering of a glyph with one keystroke was described in Molla's patent while Ethiopic users have failed to understand it. They also failed to understand that Molla computerize or digitized Ethiopic by rendering glyphs with two keystroke each. Since Ethiopic can't be rendered without using two keystrokes every Ethiopic user is plagiarizing unless they bought his software. There is thus a need to avoid this quagmire and the inventor solved it in combination with other novel methods differently and this is another claim. In simple terms if a “” glyph is followed by another glyph such as “”, both have not been rendered and settled and thus not documented. This also applies to glyphs generated by shifted glyphs such as “” with “T” and typing “” or “” does not change the non-documentation of the “”. The current invention settles every glyph.
Another novel method is as follows. When a “” typed by a “we” is followed by an “e”, the “” is broken down to a “” and “” in this novel invention. This is breaking down the “” to the glyphs mapped under the “w” and the “e” keys with a third “e” or “” key. This is also typing of the “” with “e”, “ee” or “E”, two other two keystroke novel typing methods. It is also possible to type the “” with “xe” or “”, a different novel method of typing an “” from a default keyboard differently. There is thus no need to type a glyph with a space bar. The beauty of this approach is because one also types an “” with a single “e” keystroke or “xe”. The steps are scientific description of Ethiopic documentation while we have the option to select and standardize the simplest, easiest and the best ones. It should be remembered that this principle also applies to methods where a glyph is typed with two keystrokes as in the involvement of the shift or command key and also the need to involve the vowels as third keystrokes. It should be understood that the above description about rendering and settling an Ethiopic glyph with one or more keystrokes is also a new claim because the glyphs were settled and include corrective actions involving non-documented materials.
The use of novel base ten Ethiopic numerals replacing the default Arabic as well as the numeric pad is described. The most common desktop keys are shown in
Some African languages have tones. A novel example of one of the many is shown on the “tilde” key in
Another novelty is typing glyphs such as “” series with “lt” or “t1”, “” with “t” and “” with “T” or “t1” making this approach another one and two keystroke “Senait” system. In this layout the numbers as well the minus and equals keys are dead on first keystroke. This is because the numbers are typed with the numbers as second keystrokes preceded by keys such as “tab”. This avoids the use of three keystrokes. To avoid interference all the features may not have to be utilized at the same time. It should be noted that unsuccessful attempts to hold back Ethiopic even includes deleting references to patents. Other than the obvious, the 14 command keys as well as the ones by the numeric keypad can be programmed to type with the “/”, “*” and “−” by the numeric keypad and thus with the more than 74 computer keyboard keys (
There is thus no need to type any Ethiopic glyph with three keystrokes other than for the reason that many are used to the shift keys and that is an advantage. On the other hand, typing the Ethiopic with many keystrokes for the sake of spelling out each Ethiopic glyph in English as in SERA's SIL is not a good idea because Geez typing should have nothing to do with spelling as spelling is alien to Ethiopic. Both GeezEdit and EthioSuite work with on-screen keyboards (
Comparing the two layouts, probably the best is the Qwerty as it can combine the numeric typing for third and fourth tier minority language-user glyphs. Defaults and their shifted forms could use the regular vowels as the order varieties are four. The command keys as vowels or consonants are available for optional use here. The Hele rely on the numbers forcing the command keys on the user. Relying on virtual mix is not a good idea.
Another is introduction of a space after a default or shifted glyph at the end of a word. This is claimed because the current method by others does not describe it and the problem has persisted. The addition of a space as new claim in Molla's methods to settle the glyphs is new. If one were to go to Amharic Wikipedia and write “” and then type a “” each next to the “” and “”, the word is changed to a different new word, “” because both the glyphs were never typed and settled. The typing and settling of an Ethiopic glyph with or without the need for introduction of a space is a new claim. In the Wiki example the space was already there after the “” or “”. It is a pity that some morons running Wikipedia were deleting documents about the inventor without realizing the problems with the SERA they were not documenting.
The typing is controlled through a keymap maintenance editable map accessed through one of the “Tools” menus and an example is shown in
Numerous figures were presented for the sake of giving a choice for standardization. The programming of more than 15 command keys has allowed progressive expansion of the keyboard. Even the “/”, “*” and “−” second glyphs by the numeric keypad can be separately programmed. The purpose is to allow an Amharic typist with one and two keystrokes or clicks with the least movement of the fingers. Keys not used by the language revert to English and the inventor prefers the QWERTY keyboard. African languages will have their own menus. The numeric keypad requires clearing the numlock to type the Ethiopic numerals and also perform other activities.
In previous keyboards the English vowel keys were used for Ethiopic glyphs and vowels. This unique invention by the same inventor in the 80's is close to vowel and consonant uses of the English alphabet, though the vowels do not show up in the case of Ethiopic. In the current method, the keys there and those utilized as vowels were optionally moved to the number row and elsewhere while the vowels were dedicated to the Ethiopic “” series. In the GeezEdit keyboard for computers and smartphones (
The method whereby the previous keyboard where the vowels are also used for glyphs is incorporated other than adding them to the numeric row and use them as dedicated keys. For instance, “2u”, “uu”, “us”, “Su” and “uS” can type “”. “u2” and “xu2” type “” while “′u” or “2” also type “”. Varieties eliminate confusion by picking the best as “S”, “vs” and “Sv” type “”. “t2”, “T2” or “t fn” as well as “fn t” can also types “”.
The assignment of the keys can be moved around to facilitate typing as Molla assigned the “v” key to another alphabet and empty spaces such as “J” can be used by unrelated Ethiopic glyphs. It should be remembered that even the so-called SERA is fake as the principle of representing Ethiopic with ASCII did not work.
In a virtual environment an 11 key row can be switched to a 12 key row in landscape mode as shown in
The Ethiopic need for more vowels was shown in
At Google Ethiopic typing with a mouse include addition of spaces to search (
Another novelty is the use of more than one typing methods to render and settle Ethiopic glyphs. Example “” can be typed with “2a”, “As”, etc. This is thus a combination of the Qwerty and Hele methods in a layout to avoid spread of the keys or inconvenient finger movements such as the use of the command keys. The “caps lock” can be used as any regular key.
Another novel method is correction of past errors by converting the Unicode documents to the correct current methods. One thing that has to be remembered is that the layouts are examples and not limiting. For instance, the “90-=\ and ′” keys can be assigned to “ and ” respectively adding options. Meen sets can be typed with the command keys. Another novel method is the use of “a tab” to type “” as an example. This eliminates the problem of rendering only “” from “aa” typing. This is because the unfulfilled documentation of typing “” or “” with one keystroke has remained false statements by others. Typing “” with “a tab” is another one keystroke method per glyph. Similarly, “shift t tab” renders “” eliminating a fourth keystroke. All the features may not have to be utilized at the same time. Another novelty and claim are follow-up of what have been described in previous patent application as shown in
The principles for computers also apply to on-screen and external keyboards, laptops, abbreviated and non-abbreviated smartphones keyboards and similar gadgets. Smartphones require keys in excess of the 11 per row as well as more than 5 columns and some default keys allow switching to a keyboard that revert to the default after second keystrokes. Some of these have been mentioned in previous applications by the inventor. It is also possible to reduce the number of keys per row instead of relying on landscape for fat fingers.
As shown in
As shown in in the first few keyboard figures glyphs with varying shifted and command key positions can accommodate Ethiopic typing with one and two keystrokes from around the F and J home keys in various layouts. The vowel forms assigned to the vowels, numbers, command keys and the numeric pad are more than sufficient for Geez. Three or more keystrokes are not necessary and claimed not to allow inefficiency by others as something new. For instance, some glyphs by others are typed with shift key and toggling though the vowels require picking them with three or more keystrokes. These features can be added similarly in abbreviated and non-abbreviated virtual and on-screen keyboards. In another instance the “Q” key is assigned to “” or “” keys while the one key can also be replaced by “” or “” series. For the sake of those who insist on typing some Geez series with two keystrokes, “” can be typed with “N” in the Qwerty and with “S” in Hele layout (
In one of the methods the rendered glyphs are settled through the space key. Since a key is assigned to one and changed by the following vowel provided the typeface is default, the novel methods include the use of breaking up the Ethiopic into orders an in ModEth and apply these to Unicode Ethiopic. Long hold such as on “t” can generate “” in QWERTY or generate “” on the “” key in the Heleheme keyboard. Timeout and disable keys can be incorporated. In the standalone novel method typing the “4” again as in after typing “” with “h4” reverts it to “” and “4” (with “h44”) in the Heleheme just like the “wee” typing to get “” out of “” in the qwerty typing. In the Heleheme method the default is rendered and settled with a keystroke and there is thus no need to strike the number six or any other key to settle it. Neither striking another key nor just skipping the process is novel and settling it at the end of the word or the glyph with a space or any other process is claimed. The number 6 key can thus be assigned to other keys or other functions such as seventh order “” vowel. The “” can be moved to “” position or left on the “8” key.
The virtual keyboards are modifications of the GeezEdit Amharic apps for iPhone and android smartphones covered by previous patents. In the virtual version that includes on-screen keyboard as well as those in GeezEdit and EthioSuite, different layouts are switched from the default with “shift”, “” key, “tab” “kd4” (keyboard number 4) and other command keys. The keyboard reverts to the default after rendering the glyph in those cases where typing of a glyph only is needed. If the key is to open another keyboard order, switching is after selecting the vowel form with an additional keystroke. Thus a “shift” key could open a keyboard to type “” from the settled “t” key with a keystroke. Vowel forms such as “” are then typed with “a” or “4” depending on the layout. The “” key is mainly to render the numeric varieties of the Ethiopic including the new Ethiopic numbers created by the inventor. The “kd4” button opens up a fourth keyboard for symbols such as Ethiopic copyright or Yared's symbols and quotation marks depending on need in different layouts. The keyboard reverts to the default after rendering and settling the glyph with a keystroke. Something novel over the English system is where a keystroke opens the “kb4” screen so that the required glyph including English is rendered with two keystrokes instead of the current four for Latin. In English glyphs such as “#” are typed from the “#+=” keyboard after arriving there with a prior “123” button for other symbols. The claimed novel method thus cuts the keystrokes for English by half.
Another claim is the completed and scientific version of the non-documenting type keyboarding that is close to the numeric keyboard and balloon methods similar to the Hele layout. Since the method is just another attempt without documentation, its complete version where the ordered glyphs may show up or not with spell checker as well as autocorrect is claimed. This is because these fake works have continued to hurt science and Ethiopic. As shown in
Last, but not least, it should be noted that the descriptions are examples and not limiting. Clicking on a kb4 key in the smartphone variety opens up another keyboard that can revert to the default after one or two finger strokes there. This kb4 can also generate the Meen glyphs with two keystrokes as in “kbd4 a” to type “”. The patent application is for the whole Ethiopic character set with about 500 Ethiopic Unicode glyphs. The idea is to start out with Amharic and expand to other Ethiopic-user languages though Geez language uses less characters. Thus, presenting Amharic as a stand-alone application is discouraged. A system that is dedicated to Amharic, which is about half of the Ethiopic set is also covered in the patent protection. As in GeezEdit that has been around since 1994, the Amharic must be presented such that it is not interfered with by other Ethiopic character sets while the Amharic itself should also not interfere with others as shown in this application. This is because Ethiopians have continued to tolerate even those without an app when they claimed computerizing Ethiopic Without making anything that works in Ethiopic. Similarly, there are many who claim they type Amharic without showing a simple complete Amharic set. Some of these then extend their fiction to Ethiopic because nobody seems to understand what is going on. To make things worse it is only the cheat and the copycats who read the patents and what the inventor describes and turn around and use it to cheat the gullible and ignorant.
The figures are representatives and best examples of Heleheme and QWERTY layouts are shown while the actual final versions may not look the same as in the figures. The major idea is to approximate the Heleheme and QWERTY layouts of virtual and computer keyboards. More character sets are expanded from the Amharic. The best representatives are in the first figures. Between the use of the number rows for vowels, programmed command keys, long-hold, modified patented time outs and smaller computer keys the methods provide many more Ethiopic keys. The virtual can be accommodated on a ten key per row with four or five rows and four keyboards switched to from a keystroke each as even 11 keys per row can accommodate the Geez especially in landscape format for fat fingers. The current GeezEdit Amharic type keyboard can even be improved by giving the grayed command keys the same sizes as the character keys where applicable.
There is thus no need to access symbols from a third keyboard even for English. Ten keys per row is equally good. The best options are thus to reduce the sizes of keys on computers while increasing those of smartphones for various layouts though virtual keyboards are flexible. It is possible to type all Ethiopic glyphs with no more than two keystrokes each and thus there is no need for more. For instance, the “”, “” and “” series can be typed from the “L”, “J” and “R” default keys followed by the “left ctrl” and their second orders typed by the “left fn” and so forth for the orders. The reverse typing is available but can be avoided to simplify typing. There is also no need to alter the Ethiopic to fit the gadgets made for Latin especially with virtual keyboards and the current methods are not substitutes for all previous methods by the inventor. Typing the “” from the “L” is at the expense of using three keystrokes. Typing Ethiopic with numbers and showing every glyph is primitive and not preferred by the inventor, though claimed in the novelty. The numeric pad by default type Ethiopic numerals while the number keys render the alphabetic Ethiopic numerals optionally. Numbers followed by those of pad also type alphabet numerals and the point here is to show the extensive potentials of the methods.
Ethiopic speech recognition is probably the best because of the phonetic nature of the alphabet and its addition could alleviate the problems associated with keyboards. Using a top row to switch between orders may look simple in the Hele or QWERTY smartphone keyboard while it is cumbersome in computer keyboards as it is the old numeric ModEth keyboard. The Ethiopic QWERTY has advantages here as the keys can be pushed to the home keys in both. These problems are not acute in the on-screen keyboards in variety of keyboards and they are thus the best. On-screen keyboards can still handle the Ethiopic distributed on the 37 keys and are incorporated in the current claims.
In a nutshell the current inventions include the following major solutions that Ethiopic has faced over the years. This mainly is because people were misled not to use the patented methods and were wasting their time with undocumented Ethiopic. This has continued to hurt the users ever since the computerized Ethiopic was made public in 1987. The typing and settling of an Ethiopic glyph with one or two keystrokes each are essential pre-requites. Some have gone as far as removing references to Ethiopic patents from Wikipedia to keep people in the dark. Tolerating such nonsense and lies has hurt Ethiopic and one has to ensure documentation before moving to Ethiopic spell checkers, translation and the like. It is surprising that intellectuals do not understand the difference between the typewriter and Ethiopic glyphs or apps such as Lexilogos are tolerated in spite of not typing words such as “” in Amharic and Tigrigna. EthioSuite is a dedicated publisher with novel features particularly for Ethiopic. The previous menu for regular and short versions of character set layouts has been replaced with “Hele” instead of “Short” language menu so that the user chooses one or even use both Qwerty and Hele layouts in a document. This application covers lots of materials and it may be necessary to break it up to many because of the large number of novelties.
Embodiments of the present disclosure contemplate and provide:
In further embodiments, methods are provided whereby an Ethiopic glyph is rendered and settled with two keystrokes and altered to another key such that:
9. A method whereby progressive timeout as well as keys such as “apostrophe” are optionally used in timeout and to terminate them. A method whereby a glyph rendered with one or more keystrokes is settled with a keystroke that follow it or them and it includes any key such as space bar or mouse click as addition to previous settling methods. A method whereby Ethiopic is typed with one and two keystrokes only because there are enough keys to dedicate some keys to use as vowels only because the command keys are programmed to act as regular alphabet keys. The methods allow the typing of Ethiopic from a keyboard optionally without the need to toggle though abbreviated keyboards of computer and virtual keyboards. This can be used for English and other keyboards too.
10. A method whereby more than one typing systems are used at the same or different times as in the typing of “” glyph with “;” and/or “shift t”. Apart from using the methods for the 13 Ethiopic-user representative languages, i.e. Agew/Bilen, Amharic, Bench, Basketo, Dawro, Gamu Gofa, Geez, Gumuz, Guragie, Meen, Oromo, Tigre and Tigrigna, it is utilized by numerous Ethiopicuser languages. For instance, Bench and Xamtang share the same keyboard and the inventor picked Bench because it is sorted first in Ethiopic. Geez can now be used for African languages such as Hausa, Luba, Maasai, Somali (simplified version), Soninke, Swahili, Shona, Beja (simplified version), Twi/Ashanti, Nubian, Nuer, Kikuyu, Kongo, Coptic, Oromo (simplified version), Zulu, Zande, Yoruba, Dinka, Ganda and Gebts/Egyptian according to Mark Powell (FIG. 70). The keyboarding can be used by varieties of other languages and alphabets from ASCII Latin to the international phonetic alphabet and virtually all Unicode glyphs. Virtual, external, on-screen, overlays and keyboard keys would be available for the various languages. Each African language can receive its own Geez set and languages like N'ko now have Ethiopic tonal marks. New glyphs can be created from related Ethiopic phenomes as in the past. This keyboarding improves many world alphabet documentations.
11. Methods whereby keys such as “ctrl”, “fn”, “alt” are utilized for the same Ethiopic typing methods on the left and right sides of the keyboard. Methods whereby hundreds of Ethiopic glyphs are rendered and settled with a maximum of two or three keystrokes only. The apostrophe to settle a glyph can also be included in the programming without showing it. Unlike the ABSHA method where the apostrophe feature was listed in the table (USA Patent 9000.957 to Molla) settlement is now with showing it or without. Methods whereby “one”, “three”, “four”, “five” and “six” keys (on one side as well as well as “seven”, “eight”, “nine”, “zero” and “minus” on the right) can be used for the double “”, “”, “”, “” and “”. Methods whereby “seven”, “eight”, “nine”, “zero” and “minus” can render and settle “”, “”, “”, “” and “”.
12. A superior method as the system allows the use of all current methods incorporated while improving on them. The typing methods as well as the assignment of the keys can be changed. The novel Ethiopic numerals can be typed preferably with a default keystroke each from the numeric keypad or with one or two keystrokes each elsewhere. Disabling the “numlock” should not be forgotten.
13. The system includes overlays and keyboard keys with Ethiopic and/or African languages and definition keyboards. The keyboards can be changed to accommodate different languages.
14. A method whereby “1234567” are assigned to independent default orders such as “” while 8 is reserved for the 8th order glyphs such as “”. Also [90-=] are reserved as keys to switch to while the varieties share the 8. Similar novelty is where the 34 Amharic or the 37 Ethiopic were typed from a default key each while some keys also double. In the Hele layout these assigned to the “123456789” are “” and the positions or even the glyphs can be moved around or changed. The last three can be presented with separate languages as in the past. The “” can keep their orders. This claim is because, for instance, the default or for that matter any key such as “” can be typed from the “1” key or “shift t”.
15. A method whereby “” is typed with “k L. ctrl” or “klv” This “Werkie” method can also be combined with some of the ABSHA features. For instance, “u” types “” while “′u” (“Apostrophe u”) types “” in the Werkie system. “uv” types “” and “vu” types “”. A purely “Werkie” one types “” with “vs” and “” with “uv”. Actually, ABSHA types “” with “shift u” leaving “uv” to “”. This may be complicated to use and a practical approach is to stick to one and the inventor's preference is Werkie.
16. Use the methods in on-screen keyboards and the like with mouse clicks or fingers. The method could include using methods as in SwiftKey and similar typing methods such as speech, etc. in even dedicated screens with or without mapped keys including Latin characters to type Amharic. The use of multiple methods utilized at once or separately for typing with different methods.
17. Two or more typing methods and layouts independently as in EthioSuite with or and without GeezEdit. A method whereby a glyph is typed with more than one method such as numbers and command keys are utilized. The use of multiple methods utilized at once or separately for typing with different methods. In the “” keyboard the “” key can be combined on the “q” key and the keys concentrated to the left side to avoid the right spread of the QWERTY keyboard. The “” typing can also be performed from the “F1”, “1” and/or “Q” keys.
18. A method whereby the smartphone keyboard is used at Ethiopic.com with the apps and the new keyboard. The method is built on the settling and rendering of the Ethiopic glyphs with one and two keystrokes from previous patents and incorporation from these claims. The principle is useful to improve the listing methods where choices are shown while being applicable to improve on them and other alphabets of the world.
19. A method whereby Ethiopic is typed with one and two keystrokes only because there are enough keys to dedicate some keys to use as command keys are programmed to act as regular alphabet keys. The methods allow the typing of Ethiopic from a keyboard optionally without the need to toggle through pages and abbreviated keyboards of computer and virtual keyboards. This can be used for English and other keyboards too. A method of expanding the keys through programming involves both cases and the extended ASCII. The “tab” key can also be utilized as an independent key like the other keys. Keys such as L can accommodate unrelated glyphs for brevity. Example: one of the h's. The method also allows the typing of glyphs such as “” form “90-=”.
20. The typing of Ethiopic with no more than 3 keystrokes is possible because of the use of the command keys for typing Ethiopic. “qv” types “” while “q1”, “vq”, (or “qW”) is “” and “Q1” or “Qv” is “”. Also “qv” types “” while “q1” types “” and “vq” or 1q types “”. (A simple layout is to type “” with “q”, “” with “qv”, “” with “vq” and “” with “q1”. It should be remembered that “” can also be typed with “qtab”, “Shift q”, “q ctrl”, “ctrl q”, “q L. Arrow” and more. A method of progressively adding the typing methods as the languages increase without interfering with typing of the small character sets. For instance, Amharic can use the “qa” () and “aq” () typing while the Guragie can use the numbers. Typing “” with “ax” is not recommended because of interference. The apostrophe to settle a glyph can also be included in the programming without showing it. Unlike the ABSHA method where the apostrophe feature was listed in the table (U.S. Pat. No. 9,000,957 to Molla) settlement is now with as well as not showing it. It is possible to type “” with “aaq” or “aQ” or “qA” or “Qa”, or “R ctrl” with “q” or “q” with “R ctrl”. The second “a” key could be dead. This also applies to three keystrokes where the shift key is involved as in typing “” with “T” and then “Te” for “”. Typing the “Tee” reverts the “” to “”. A method is also where the typing methods are progressively added to the smaller character sets without altering them. The number 1 key does not have to act as a vowel in those cases where the shift is utilized to render first order glyphs. It is also possible to cut on the Amharic choices as the Ethiopic-user language character sets is increased. Because of the availability of more than one way to type a glyph, it possible to limit the choices and instead focus on unique typing for each method. Typing “” with “ax” is not recommended because of interference. The apostrophe or extended ASCII glyphs to settle a glyph can also be included in the programming without showing it. It is possible to type “” with “aaq” or “aQ” or “q” and “R ctrl”.
21. The major novelty is the display and settlement of a default glyph with a keystroke and its subsequent modification with vowels without affecting the default settlement. Another major novelty is the display and settlement of a default glyph with two keystrokes and its subsequent modification with vowels without affecting the default settlement. The two keystrokes may involve any including the shift and command keys. The above description for the QWERTY keyboard can apply to any layout and moving the glyphs around or stacking the characters do not make any difference and thus not novel. There are numerous modifications and that it is difficult to cover all the methods. For instance, the rendering and settlement of an Ethiopic glyph with a single default key or with two keystrokes though shift applies to variety of layouts. Two or more keys also render and settle a glyph and that is another claim. The 37 qwerty keys can handle the same number of the Ethiopic in both layouts. A “” can be typed with “ha”, “h4” or both while the “4” key can also type default glyphs such as “” and “”. Another major novelty is where a command key such as “tab” is programmed whereby a key generates different glyphs by typing it ahead or after it through background programming and governing key sequence table. Another major novelty is where a glyph generated with one or two keystrokes is rendered and settled by incorporating a non-printing glyph through programming and governed by a key sequence table.
22. The cellphone applications (
24. Current Ethiopic applications include apps such as GeezEdit, a memory resident application, for computers and smartphones that works in numerous apps made for English and other alphabets. The layout is also used in a dedicated Ethiopic publisher app, EthioSuite. The apps allow switching to English with one or two keystrokes or mouse clicks or taps. The layouts are standardized for potential use in many applications such as programming in Ethiopic languages as well as features such as speech and other methods the Latin alphabet uses. A standardized Ethiopic layout can then be used in different media such as computers, smartphone, on-screen keyboard, etc as in
25. The system can be used with variety of on-screen keyboards in apps such as Notepad or dedicated screens where the 37 keys represent an order is claimed in the novel methods. This includes modification for use with only one hand.
This U.S. Non-Provisional Patent application claims the benefit of priority from U.S. Provisional Patent Application 63/294,691, filed on Dec. 29, 2021, the entire disclosure of which is hereby incorporated by reference. The present application is also related to U.S. Patent Application Nos. 62/212,17, 62/921,217, Ser. Nos. 16/891,303 and 15/394,230, and U.S. Pat. No. 10,133,362, and International Application PCT/US20/36011, the entire disclosures of which are hereby incorporated by reference.
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
63294691 | Dec 2021 | US |