Talk:Typebar

Typebar's illustrating picture is not suited to the evidence for David's statements on two points.

This picture is front-strike machine's and staged event 'cause of too much tangles. Jamming typebars' picture should be on up-strike-machine's and during actual operation. It's because this picture should illustrate David's statements. The type-writing machine at prototype era, it should have up-strike mechanism. --Raycy (talk) 17:07, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

David wrote new doc that is David(2000), and I haven't read though. It should be checked because his "jamming problems led to QWERTY" theory was on suspicion for a while.--Raycy (talk) 18:15, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Associate Professor Koichi Yasuoka points out two facts that should be proven ,


 * 1) The existence of the nuisance of type-bar collisions


 * 1) Strong regulation between keys' layout and type-bars' arrangement

,during the prototype-machine era.--Raycy (talk) 18:40, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Yasuoka also says up-strike machine's type-bar should never been called as 'arm'. I gess it might be called as 'arm'.--Raycy (talk) 18:40, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Path dependence
David said path dependence with showing QWERTY as the evidence.

It is like the "jubaku" ; spelled binding phenomena ;phenomena spell bound with;.

拘束条件 condition of constraint // restraint condition binding on physics, binding on code table structure

呪縛-THE JUBAKUHaunted Forest (film)
 * 1) http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E5%91%AA%E7%B8%9B
 * 2) http://eow.alc.co.jp/%E5%91%AA%E7%B8%9B/UTF-8/

紙テープの呪縛 paper tape（Yasuoka）

テレタイプの呪い teletype（Yasuoka）, 5-bit rellay bindng

Early in the QWERTY's borning, there were the results of traveling typebars around on the typebasket , every bar wired or linked to the each key with. Surviving the vital motion of typebars to the last, along or on the vertical plane much freely.(Raycy)--Raycy (talk) 04:17, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

For explaining David's QWERTY statement is important
The typebararticle's ballance paying for David's is good, I agree. If affirm or not, David's idea should be explaned. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Raycy (talk • contribs) 05:48, 11 September 2009 (UTC)