ࡱ; E  !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}~Root Entry  !"#$%&'()*+,-/3456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQSWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefghijklmnopqrstu  FMicrosoft Word-Dokument MSWordDocWord.Document.89q  9T5 #%Oh+'0 p x  45@ Hl@J@TK-@b) Tomislav Tomislav# [jjDefault1$ *$7$5$3$A$/B*OJQJCJmH sH PJnH^JaJ_HtHFQBF Heading 1^]`CJ 5`QB` Heading 4+@& & F & F^]`OJQJCJ5BA@BAbsatz-Standardschriftart44Caption Characters22Numbering Symbols66BulletsOJQJCJPJ^JaJ6U!6 Internet Link B* ph>*FV1FVisited Internet Link B* ph>*4BB4 Text bodyx$a$FBFHeading x$OJQJCJPJ^JaJ /Ab List^J ZArZTable Contents+$d%d&d'd $$a$$ DqD Table Heading  $$a$ 65]\@@Caption xx $CJ6^J aJ]:: IllustrationOJ QJ 65,,TableOJ QJ 650A0Frame contents&&Index $^J PPBibliography 1"^]` q 4>4Title$a$CJmHsH52JQB2Subtitle $a$CJ6Slika!4"4Figure" OJ QJ 65BBTa$(<@Xhdux0 defghijklmnoB-|\\b]]xxx.y^yyyz` DFf pqrstuvwxyz{|}~UnknownTomislav :Pi )**+,,2?2A2999XBXcXXXXYNYOYYYYZTZZ+[[[[[[$\\].]F_XX:: : XXXXXXXX!#Ibd  X2$scpg2P Yb$+Y&ZR(e@(     fA?C"  TC"    `A?C"  TC" N s *; < C;Ia*4*4[4~* .77.RR.nn.....  .[]pp[.]oo[]n n[]N N[]. .[] [] []  []OJ QJ CJ^JaJ77OJ QJ CJ^JaJRROJ QJ CJ^JaJnnOJ QJ CJ^JaJOJ QJ CJ^JaJOJ QJ CJ^JaJOJ QJ CJ^JaJOJ QJ CJ^JaJ  OJ QJ CJ^JaJOJ QJ CJ^JaJ77OJ QJ CJ^JaJRROJ QJ CJ^JaJnnOJ QJ CJ^JaJOJ QJ CJ^JaJOJ QJ CJ^JaJOJ QJ CJ^JaJOJ QJ CJ^JaJ  OJ QJ CJ^JaJ Numbering 1 Numbering 5>,G,N,],^,g,n,t,u,~,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,8:A:H:K:M:N:W:^:b:f:g:p:w:{:::::::::::::::::::::::_______````` ` ````````"`&`*`.`2`6`:`>`B`F`J`K`S`U`W`Y`[`]`_`a`c`e`g`i`k`m`o`p`q`u`y`}```````````````````````````````````````````aaa"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""aP GTimes New Roman5Symbol3&ArialG& Luxi SansArialOLucida Sans Unicode5TahomamNimbus Roman No9 LTimes New Roman_ StarSymbolArial Unicode MSG Luxi SansArial5Tahoma5&Tahoma5SymbolBhiEiE}\}\'0 t:!DyK yK Nmailto:tomislav.nakic-alfirevic@fer.hrDyK yK :mailto:marijan.djurek@fer.hrDyK yK >http://www.gigliwood.com/abcd/DyK yK jhttp://www.cse.ogi.edu/~dylan/dvorak/DvorakIntl.htmlDyK yK jhttp://www.cse.ogi.edu/~dylan/dvorak/DvorakIntl.htmlDyK yK @http://www.mwbrooks.com/dvorak/DyK yK phttp://www.pcguide.com/ref/kb/layout/alphaSingle-c.htmlDyK yK Fhttp://www.ffzg.hr/infoz/dzs/html/DyK yK Thttp://home.t-online.de/home/Zoran.Proks/DyK yK Thttp://ei.cs.vt.edu/~cs5724/g1/index.htmleDd c f  BA?2 jQ?8E  p! jQ?8E  jQ?8E  p0c!8=xxUU7wM9 E#0 *E }J@bH:*%"DL@9Dpfw8mUkC%[H- <:B HJU-L-RYx>;;ٳRϿ*zY'y zbQ[,1jF xW1FexSl5*Xr9v*^{Wl6FMEuhg [vb myFc!b>E#FL7Fc @$cƲ m l㌭[18' W&܅9@".-A^J@i(/o[QU&'P_N2!gM%S^'F7`F&l sc XdvoxȘ_x` yx1-ҳӭ"·!y_ܸ;H=-@JbU/UsJ>!uWGwt[Su ᯛ.h?Z!ZD ]U4oc-Qˋhmue\ꢛ?Bu^?E?-En>G;a0^g??T H=X8zLjqz zzzW队zw[o&q&su>lll}x $gkYZr&r~U&R'9Ct]UNTa+'rus9At[9VѺRdn CpdKdn7Y,dt5^<]N~* fzlS^Ν ~6\x_/[kk&WPңGe8RVHYSrHzD#! E)Q0ݡt-Bש]oԊ.Q ʠ&t>:AգTG>TRM}Z[>S^$s u.Gw G>A74]*_LBem:{~D'9q6f=lś9c7p>^U*goQ~;zڿ?H2S9$S3 1eIԓrF%j8 80 H  XB/ ' +t #th4)C=ɥ 52U ޕUUxGPLQorU^UYFkU)N&׫r*.7br*"W6UXnWNeor*(2U$A_~<ɣ,yҽFx]+xDq\{<@}PϨrd6’\Er.W1i^*)Jɼ2*'-ןd>R*^oȗ\oB%YUYtUˮ{vUBP>] B9:@GN@Wnz@O^Q_?BC  Q0 `8xSC= ȲP]qUwdi[汤| [UV*-ca "XW>Nz.yϏuX Z呹]~qXS-6K'e"!u#G4O,>{쁳 畏׋F<;~G#\gZ1;۟V|:/k̯VZbQ MS7gJg? >O5d&O08263xyGde3{ù(nf7Bw554Φ/4:P+G5P"B]!΍6\ f4Pyz7Ik~f:ibPW"4LQ:lhs 50ka~E̙4ڜFI4G/i9fq4ˌA4HpZh3Vh'ǦkhMf,uh9k%hoڝb&$3m.f 5נKs 4Si-y+4(@{脺AE!Eb!W#a ǘ)k&@"ǙI^ps)4W!Ks ǚ{y=̓c<~9}/oeut_K|ݝ7g;o]w|}S{7?7q{-?qp{YZILV"ʚ.k"Xc`06\Vrn+zst?hy6@#6Ԅ V PJbP |Dzwe"e]%.CuuKXG)}Q{J{5w/t=~tϥt=P{]vxps8:㎡݃;#;,GKa^KY"|ƼAuB3kmqC Drq+!Ex.bWI\ؚ΅Yl[sekK /maڄ5ߎݍLE!cGi~>l^DF3=!_A/#ܤc?q^ȫ-uԝ FiS|;Ͼ+/D57`E`X8+`c+qTϝOq|0#8F/h{kGn mz  U?m:MM+EK姟p{sk}ors}3> t:Ӹ>5.q5k^^o˕l~SO?\Q :_ù?(r?}!hҺ\JBrT*Ad$-PWAȇs HETAߦYgқU-No4zG׻z/U;L5:@2kjz&iTOzUIH\Q{C~zu:z`Q#tH6t4б(?׍Nz4uQ$jv>G{mn+D-u2\Bt 5kЏކ>}CTE?y'>?܄~=ɵZP~_Pc߀PC>4(@{脺AE!EP!W#a )\W'@"I^W}?ѫނ|&z/7RV$ѧV_D3Ɲ-|wC{G@ n_u?w~sWQm6Rmy;G˾ϻ;׾ũuo_%#YNcq>n'|Nt{7{y;xe|Nv"_=fOL{ +0j@_# AЛo=+A;iA&UPTPuBP*= d9q1;Y9 BP}P*T*P j \+hku@h'@l;c==sۋ뎽Dn"{בb};̝@N9tds]'?vq>7t-n\n\Nrrk'?ss[;nN*wtvs'g;wv6qg-;)YINt9I^TL>ŁXN Dq?'B9 8i- 49jCMxl%e$* yОH8.vnQ/*8!z:gsʫs98 YMYL;3Z93;S3;cS':#G HDP ',GLEIDdc):+A_8{(959B4ris;hI1 ܦX8aañG`F`FbGb>Ga^Ga|c \+hku@h'cN<8c9ڙC<ؙQ\tg1G8+œ5̅ {A`_ds;̝@NsW+?C@ +?C@ .c8x XպwmGs(-- syzn =*E9J^OWdwH1ɂq[OU{Xua~??suా+vѰk腫8Q)]VYk9?s|X߈>kh ;2ǽy<ӿZ=+STK}kbOֺ (sukiוf[lE{ %v9hC(Z#S3L0Z"iLde)h)2P#i d@K)B(@K;ݨ|:ˮ^v6@Md{K_zEjyٖlCŀhCw܀+pQsp!юnKD{EZ]DEgZ(|hNSĻ4^GcDOJsM#? (V Da"P'©wE#S'G"ڈDj%QsL^"Q@bU1j2֢jLz]LzxDjp] Nou$%R_()TOGx)I A80$tgcYb-VzHaƻ ?p|Kpn" ?i(,R^j2jkQ=h$re g@ ~2z!{}"(H0d2JP>̎CiLIr8MC?)4ٞ/GRL} rLNr^X+a^E;k䣳>k<@1Qr/=щVCbOz|%q[ی\@A!"Ow'{rGgO%Z.r͸~v..[ٓӼ-^V*?eUߨw?Q'zڿ?N7U5ꎇ1eԕ*2]U2W@20 H8x_.Q0! p !  !C? zC/ =A7=C?ڂ7\ބD.STՃ:r *Ԕ\WJUUeF(תu\*UyQrzN~mYC=#wRr*)rPʖ%@8以}s?U?ۨ.o_Жp<'QV*G9p/HQQ:E|QUj_xYڎ[MY*Ԓ%e)G+qԇYGcxCvxA3YZ9Gk_ wtޅEzAoA@ ! !"P$ h)2b!!PH$a$C |#a?Rh Û)41/||"汒 淢|񒬀/5( b]<\Baܫ2@V=vULnUrl"ϞȸFmd8@Ig?Jcϸ<=T{\{UI樗"업72#5#cS 14YؗY9ΟV mȓ9TB-Uw,su`@LL@T߃p+o+5{xp yU\TZ}jUiITڢ&65vѴ[T PJGT<}bM' :‹)@ߪD<7dS(? ׍jWPTڃvvhwʦ*mf6ZO;hKԗQqZNwT]XMZ`lA&VCI(͟rP*C5yM 1xiQ+A/苺 "F !G04j4Odl:Pşld/mZkJdrWmQj2{]|sEޯ~B y.Szb^8<ܞ5 Z #QF~݊o^E-?>wVrC\S}bjGTyqgxqWyq'xQcSnH#?0sq{8C-`l8c5b%m,A4r!x1C 1Fq$H c0F s't4P ej@UkCU ,m HYH!m 5@ )8KidSG1a5)JCdJJ6'4ҍy4ƘM㌙4јJ4K34H9F 3GPZh'F,ѴD+"qHeF"Fd1RQ~CqeLB]S)B{3t#9h3&+h@c-mQƗQ48';0pFw0 y&VCI(͉F9xkTÚׄPW >e􂾨+B!m@r#x\bLFΦs Yfd#{9n2ٿ$uG{)S nq߾ùW⴫pc/3j/!xvPv\ٛc xm/?T\ݳLu޸d_ңW<]9*B\{gt}h ^UX?~UTPZ0-U=oU/wEN:;N$|_ } c 7LP[rP*C5yM 1xiQ+A/苺 "F !G04j4g=9ξ:Fr:YD&;zn~OCfq/}W@p>l_`k|G"Q.B8{`Bp{SׯsW`Ž-n 4CͰeI5zsBg-ζ*ܺ9e^l}Ϲy^fry55^gN7Z&k oVVV+YټV&f.k cV $߬}V~+z@"͡)4([ CC(-D{ }m݁˺F;Kú:I۬oܶZG m&k;m6k=VZSZm-UBZ@˭̚EtZlMk-2(JVeY)4NDi%4+H8GRMsXZ`!;O+Z;md Κ>@2i>f9Rc}F~k#!k}ew;j<+Yt:MXg)ߺH'+tҺNt*33L.`bb>a^YU|ǼW|uQWDG;|JSI+OX[k*[7>f-௭E|ZGn%2wۇ Ew[#1o ыedGd'/As-R ,'Sj4ϸ_9}pEw]CշjdK~MB~Ӿoٷ}[۾m>ϾvwOqG;;_sW+~>g/9po{skgs?;ۙ`@{ a GrIb'@,Q`atECShuQT*P u2P [<@d߁h_/@OR_7R/{S{3k'?{u?b/N`%_{ө= Πv:5N7Nvյ㊄~$5KofmC=NEh#MaI,183 @{#[)EQ~0 };o" P}4.ᘟᶃG&'cޒ1)PS1ߩTxi:\7k!u@ꎁxdNB jO!TN?x{o/X{K8^6^\ #AAd2w ;39d"z ymyodM-/ۉj`kU.) 7o Dd[ +f  BA?2S J v /p!' J v J v <\`A"Xxx6^ 2I!JM4CJ*ФQz @h("T*"*{!Edkw OհA) ѐi}>g$d[S`̝?B۷Ͽ?_sx |,'nWrJ%> u;c֝9';7ѧ˳ӹoFU%T_H%/59}z a/g|;ۣEwx[DƍKG`5Hg3W lizUӛk:Cr^%_Kz|9Hϓ,9@OG!{=JvdW$e'=Pvd{3&βn/['dK\Ѝe3l&aXאtU$r2^@C < 9xL_\ 㢁xvzh7Ch׈&zhfzhSDK=[3Dk=EozhGtЯNEE?'#ψ)Gwt[1@u31H7xIZb!FtE1AuKZVALוDňxCa81Z#uH :`n ^]fw1X~cHϣDǠ$KO7Q?+r}M$=Igazz;Ez})~|CdaLF# 3wk|{Mѻ "zC+~_n|h&+^cqT*}UzݻW{u:b&Yʐu2Z#Y+e\V"YzWXoXka͒qtY˚"&:k|zUֳ^Y/ǭgelh.A6fVKj*[X eK><"[YV **Ay*e[W!7@vC~+pA/p\>ð_tQsAww+.wB6vJR8d=Qa;Dc|\|-1;tı1{5u7o&~zqB ?W_Wݕ/4rʿz+})! 2%dŀ x$.yH%~?ۅqn˕;#w!aN$ZV%n$MjKZmi ]kMh) Mu:KcsAat^)>0=Ohgi; Č)g;$0aQTf*YJ*Pq"$Ϩ|B+d 26`RrO]Qy[}lu: T}'&};???_?}?NN>*.#ȅw ^a8$-Cd#iWF鼲"5Wd/s5a5N:Na]L%d]R>K˺:R>PV!Jc2DuU&PSw~X6Ļ.ԓclCKx“:@G <]] ޱ7@ 7~? DYxC ^a(U#`$0Wq>uBxHqP]žUl+'O`[2..[{ נ.(4ik ^`\ \ '7U.YK~sո,+i%+h!RKD_Y ۢA(BaLnȅc ȁ9$͌G)`}lss-{zAB P( 2WPB&E!O"/'\F~<C> PYE>jP\G>4FϽ`yD'@﫽 -!Qċ~LwNj^G0?=uS͟p->5a\r9ťy\397s(o`qeWi32u|Q|&-> 5ԛGj:giQMt+!UMEj2χjτd5'0JMa!1[_]1V8)cPsaj5vPAMa-j̃Zml8I5Zėi K+ZΟSJZ:>Lx?mN&vhg^N :(/Ox}iNɶtU1x=oq[ oM.c T|j6E૨GJ[Yf_*έVr0UiVpZEJH+@Zʱk[A@ hOwAbA0`L\o\5RkPCj QNԸ#dLWjW|Em&w&k>;gws~vB|#%#.sPO @NslODϫ?m01G㟈w+QeTkڨiFm^fF ^`|#2*iF jF8O4ByX#62LnaPzɸW E583 4ND`UT?kQzU#]=cTHu7\͘ ɪ1^Q)c$`Hz@Wm >qXDc(]5G-EPSjˇV5=A 6n 5b\oi 3>Ƨ4X07Dc7M6vTc+M76ӛF1-c7Vc-62cj#%RZir# [EKXqJ1<=̵fa7 ;8FIy&giqu\qU#fܢQ/`[0!nWp5( %+FjTh q4PIFhmI\zB?H6Pc`LM BX5` j@-a;jۉCp9 m|^3RcjqE7~Pj!г O3r A?<ȏyF!N1"%yQQB%^ DV'}W{^}nowv~/hė|Q|WJ5_ | `azLf+fmfN6LbӼr?2/)F9Yl1O<1GT^}*K7UܠBtX4Sa 3߅TAs6̀dq0Pm$@聱]#V)C}_jaXPG$D]/uQb8̛d2 |3/ڧ 5>Y{Jw;S 7vgT^amτd˞(I0c:A;hcB<u0w֨X3 kA QKFX4Ͱ4HS쫨Ghߢ7lVm_8;zj^(TH5ʮj q4P&条;~m 0c8S1כ0ckԐZ6vԶ5Ej?s8h&JPj-гg>cy~vm;?z;؅x~//+첼ҎB*Zd`= ){?>߽?Xн/.(¿AQcPY94 *"X:Y9Y;8 aӱ'[NNbǹT{:T^9; 8'UsL=Qa!U٧]UI U.9a$DUa8 !A:B[hB] Z@?-$Ug-pcMX#eB P!1 sNRvηT̹L%kT8Rurr[UpN>U SNU):eTa9Tcߪcj`k`?kb_k:~a㜾m0$0qcaMk25b !dnuZ ~JE:gJ;TI\q^zzcpw89 CFCB?G2;QJ|+ >DABP݀~Νv:ν9$h 7™ኍpu = |#cTfx:_)~CΫ5{ߝgΚ!w9{U9ݟ<m?{g#n]>n-n gѼխțr--ʫpNsC9x‹\&wspK<Ͻ,^Tsj{&`{JMvOQ5@P=uwf܍jF+!Ur.C\<3!Y w'0J$ B1±M!sՇ:;kThˠ⨥j CmPcjf9Ȁ ^Ye~Kܯ(滟Z~HKÔ4w7rwZw+s776]EY .=b.;tMɶwS頛ﭢZ8n msQM릻h{kYZCi{5H[eVWwCnJqBI Zuc!׶6ԃjZ@x׼3t !0F``*z|b4X2Pf؎vƽAp'Wj{^-sT½V=yt77w0t 67^}_wey,T76>sz^& 3gN/}^ ?EU /+yϋ^a~+\E=yKzĥ[*}yTyU;*z*y'Ue*!Uۧb]XoJUKŪ.0a千0l }<<y-3xf@- Xꈄ+PPs0j*yG(&S9;.Pk*}A%ST;NQ*}@TKz;ELm//lo5=॑RNoiO-<2{0Z cMX#eQioj؇zQUQ$xQ%82=]'ߣ^U3c^>F^+xeTS/J54^j}kk}ll}m嵃N55 $#1n,L0ś1BXuҰZ5d,ۍQQU;Oޙ:90zz&z:zgpe9\e0kan1p)s$ = >&^m tT+yNX8? ;0;1韎Dg!s[>.ҿ_/A"4\5HZ$/_G3 HFҿ ߌ߂g"HV+ҿ ߆oClC#ۑHv; H>cBGh 0WSz+H("P_8 5v+ _FW!+Hrҿ_/DE#)H<: NCH1'H'Hqqq8`Ha0 31xs/eX' kPC&jRCHA?ҿ߃Fv";s{[у[Ћ H:-ҿOC#KϋH|-Ht!韄G"cd MHFK7zsoffice.StarMathDocument.6Embedded Object[PK20amimetypeapplication/vnd.sun.xml.mathPK20 content.xmlUn@Þf*IR WSd%{'B/ lm qޮ=oߌ ?|&ZM 0 Caolan70"F_d plt$LdH<La! } | -$(R^ (/hR"%<a The Dvorak keyboard layout and possibilities of its regional adaptation Tomislav Naki-Alfirevi, Marijan urek Faculty of Electrical Engineering and Computing, University of Zagreb HYPERLINK "mailto:tomislav.nakic-alfirevic@fer.hr"tomislav.nakic-alfirevic@fer.hr; HYPERLINK "mailto:marijan.djurek@fer.hr"marijan.djurek@fer.hr Abstract. During the last several decades, the keyboard has proved to be the most important computer input device. It was inherited from the mechanical typewriter from whom computer keyboards inherited a suboptimal key layout. Better solutions have been kept out of use by economic pressure. An arguably optimal layout for the English language is the Dvorak layout. This article discusses the possibility of applying the same guidelines and ideas that shaped the Dvorak layout on keyboards used in other languages. Some of the questions answered are how good the Dvorak layout is in English, how good is it in other languages and how a language specific version would look like. Keywords. Dvorak, layout, keyboard, left handed, right handed, frequency, regional, national, language Introduction A machine with a complicated system of levers and weights called the typewriter was invented around 1870. During the next several decades typists used a typing technique called the Columbus technique (typing using two index fingers). At the time, typing competitions were organized in order to motivate typists to improve their typing skills. A Frank E. McGurrin won one such competition in 1888. using a technique he developed himself called touch typing (typing using ten fingers). His victory was the beginning of modern dactylography and as such plays a vital part in keyboard layout design. The main goal of any typist is to type as fast with as few errors as possible. Breakthroughs like McGurrin's ten finger typing made the typists a lot faster and typewriters had to be improved in order to facilitate such fast typing. Finally, typists got so fast that typewriters often jammed and got broken. Unable to design better machines, engineers decided to rearrange the keys so that it would actually be harder to type and their idea was a complete success. The problem is that the same basic layout used a hundred years ago to slow down typists (known as "qwerty" by the letters on the left side of the upper key row) is used today on several hundred million computers around the world. The fundamental computer input device  the keyboard - seams to leave a lot of room for improvement. The Dvorak layout The Dvorak layout [1][2][3][4] was constructed to be the optimal layout where "optimal" simply means "fastest". There are a number of factors that have some impact on typing speed and comfort: letter frequencies, key reachability, human hand anatomy, certain regularities found in any text in any language, and one or two others.  Obviously, not all letters occur with the same frequency: vowels are a good example of very frequent letters. Knowing that it takes a certain amount of time to reach any key on the keyboard and knowing that some keys can be reached faster than others an optimization problem arises: how should the letters be placed on the keyboard in order to minimize the total time necessary to type a certain amount of text? Presuming that the reach time for each key is known, placing the letters on the keyboard could be done by minimizing a function like this one:  EINBETTEN soffice.StarMathDocument.6 (1) where freq() is the occurrence probability for character c in a given language and t() is the time to reach c for the given layout. A layout analysis cannot, however, be based solely on this kind of time analysis. Even if non statistical factors are ignored, occurrence frequencies of two- and three letter structures as well as top row  bottom row jump frequencies should be taken into account if more precise results are desired. Human hand anatomy includes a number of factors that must be taken into account in order to design a good layout. It is easier to drum the fingers from the little finger to the thumb than the other way around. Also, not all fingers are equally strong or equally fast: their speed and agility decreases from the thumb to the little finger. Furthermore, it is a lot easier to type alternating hands than typing series of characters with the same hand because there is a much higher degree of independence between two hands than between two fingers. A key property of most languages is the alternation between vowels and consonants: a property that played the key role in the design of the Dvorak layout. Why is this so important? Because it goes hand in hand with the fact that typing alternating hands is naturally faster and easier. This means that vowels can be grouped under one hand and the most frequent consonants under the other to make the basis for a very fast typing mechanism. Another detail of the Dvorak layout is the special attention to index fingers. Because other fingers normally cover only three keys (taking into account only letter keys) and index fingers cover 6 keys each, their keys must be a little less frequent to compensate such a heavy load. That is the main reason that not very frequent letters U and H are placed under the index fingers. It is worth noting that the Dvorak layout is more a set of principles to guide layout design than a certain keyboard. August Dvorak also designed keyboards for one handed people, both left and right handed, for instance. It is exactly those principles that are going to be used in this article to shape a language specific keyboard. But before the methodology is explained and results presented and interpreted, due attention must be paid to problems encountered during research preparation and analysis. Problems and questions A number of problems and questions appear when analysing keyboard layouts and their characteristics. These problems will first be explained and solutions to most of them will be proposed later on. To be able to compare layouts, a method of comparison should be selected. Layout quality is closely related to three sets of factors: human hand anatomy, distance travelled by fingers during normal typing and the nature of language. Of these factors, the only one suitable for analytical processing is the nature of language: it is possible to measure letter frequencies, statistically analyse those frequencies and make deductions based on those results. It is, however, difficult to measure factors related to hand anatomy and distance travelled by fingers can only be roughly estimated. It is, for instance, hard to quantify the fact that it is easier to drum fingers from the little finger to the thumb than the other way around so it's impact to typing speed is hard to estimate. Most tangible results will come from statistical text analysis and because of that the question of sample quality is raised. What is "normal" text? Language evolves relatively fast so the time of writing of a certain text is very important: modern English can hardly be considered equal to the language that Hamlet was written in. Also, a book about e.g. prenatal development is likely to have different letter frequencies than the daily news. Furthermore, how much text is enough? The problems mentioned so far could be considered preparation problems, problems that arise before any actual measurement. A question that should be answered as a result of data analysis is how good the Dvorak keyboard really is in English. The question will be answered mostly on the basis of statistical test results which will also show how efficient the Dvorak layout is in other languages. What would a language specific layout based on the principles guiding the Dvorak layout look like? The analysis results will obviously show a certain level of similarity in Dvorak layout usage in different languages: how strong should the similarities be to justify use of a only slightly modified English Dvorak layout in another language? Should an important consideration in layout design be standardization? How much of an efficiency loss would a certain level of standardizations justify? Finally, one of the more problematic questions addressed in this article is the question of language specific letter placement: every language has it's special characters and on a keyboard of fixed proportions compromises must be made. Statistical text analysis will shed some light on these problems. Analysis  methodology and results One of the key factors that make a certain layout efficient is letter occurrence frequency. Occurrence frequencies show how much a certain letter is used and in order to calculate those frequencies a small collection of programs have been written. The input is a collection of files, the content of each file is read and absolute or relative letter occurrences in each file are printed out. Before results are discussed, a few words must be said about the text samples. A number of sample texts[6][7] have been chosen from 19th Century Croatian literature, 20th Century Croatian literature, some contemporary translations to Croatian, 20th Century English literature, a translation to English, 19th Century German literature and translations to German. Although newer novels might have been a better choice, they are mostly under copyright and so they were not chosen. The novel as a literary form has been chosen because of it's size (most samples range from 200000 to 800000 characters) and expression style which is a much more appropriate than that of e.g. lyrical expression forms. The number and size of individual files is greatest for Croatian samples and smaller for English and German samples. The purpose of English sample analysis is to illustrate the basic ideas behind the Dvorak layout. German samples analysis results are used as a reference point for the much more precise results for Croatian: any common property is likely to show up during such an analysis. Capturing those similarities allows construction of hypothesis about the underlying principles of language specific adaptation of the Dvorak keyboard in more than one language. Two quantitative criteria are introduced to measure to what degree a certain layout is adequate for use in a given language (or vice versa). The first criterion is a total finger travel distance measure. Total finger movement during typing can be approximated using these simple rules: the distance from a finger to the key under it is considered zero, the distance to a key in a different row or a different column is d and the distance to all other keys is 2d. Formula 2 calculates a total finger travel distance index for a given vector of letter occurrence frequencies:  EINBETTEN soffice.StarMathDocument.6 (2) where freq() is the measured relative occurrence frequency for letter c, and dist() is the distance to the character as defined above. To estimate a distance instead of a distance index, d would have to be expressed in real unit (e.g. 1.5 cm), but since it is only used to compare layouts for a given language, the absolute total distance is of no practical importance. Application of the formula on the described samples gives the results presented in Table 1. Table  SEQ "Table" \*Arabisch 1. Total distance index per a given language-layout pair LanguageLayoutDistance indexCroatianDvorak41,18Croatianqwertz57,63EnglishDvorak31,54Englishqwerty57,37GermanDvorak37,31Germanqwerty63,64The results should not be taken for granted as some of Croatian and German letters aren't assigned to keys on the Dvorak layout. Their distances were mostly set to 2 because they aren't easy to reach in existing keyboard layouts which is logical considering their low occurrence frequencies. Also, it is worth noting that the standard Croatian layout today is a variation of qwerty called qwertz as the "y" and "z" letters have exchanged places. While differences between languages for each layout exist, the distance traversed by fingers is obviously much shorter for the Dvorak layout: about 40% for Croatian, 70% for German and over 80% for the English language. The numbers could have been expected: the Dvorak layout was constructed for use in English. These results are, however, the first confirmation of previous assumptions and the first measure of similarity between two other languages with English. The second criterion of layout usability is based on a measure of time. It takes into account the time to reach a certain key, similar to the total distance criterion. It also takes into account two additional factors: any key press takes a certain amount of time and not all fingers are equally strong or fast: index fingers are strongest followed by middle fingers and so on. The total typing time formula is as follows:  EINBETTEN soffice.StarMathDocument.6 (3) where t1 is the time needed to press a key, treach() is the time required to reach a certain key, n is the total number of different letters and reach() is a factor that takes individual finger abilities into account. The reach() function assigns reach difficulty to letters ranging from 8 to 10 from the middle to the little finger, respectively. The index finger is assigned the value 8 rather than 7 because it reaches for 6 instead of 3 keys which means that a loss of parallelism occurs (because the same finger types the whole word, e.g. "hum" on the qwerty keyboard). The assignment of these values is purely an educated guess, but should be good enough to illustrate the layout differences and demonstrate the methodology. More precise factors could possibly be calculated using, for instance, Fitt's law [8]. According to that law, movement time is a logarithmic function of distance when target size is kept constant, and movement time is also a logarithmic function of target size when distance is kept constant. However, Fitt's law predicts key reach time in one dimension only. More importantly, the precision of parameters based on Fitt's law would still be hard to estimate and would still be suboptimal compared to real measurements. Results for all three languages and both layouts are presented in table 2. T* denotes the total typing time without the time t1 to press a key. If t1 is estimated at at 3 time units (compared to 8-10 to reach the keys), the differences are a bit smaller than those found using the total distance formula. An estimate seems to be the best that can be done here because key press time depends highly on key resistance, key press depth (laptop keyboards are, for instance, a lot more shallow than their standard desktop equivalents) and so on. The final results estimate an increase in total typing time from 30% (Croatian) to over 60% (English) with German still somewhere in between (50%). Table  SEQ "Table" \*Arabisch 2. Total typing time index per a given language-layout pair LanguageLayoutT*TCroatianDvorak355457Croatianqwerty484586EnglishDvorak263341Englishqwerty478556GermanDvorak318408Germanqwerty530620The relative frequencies of most frequent letters in the three sampled languages are shown in table 3 (less frequent characters than the ones shown are omitted). Relative occurrence frequencies listed in the table are average frequencies for a given language based on the described sample. That means that all the samples for each language have been processed as one representative sample for the language in question. The data in the table shows relative occurrence frequencies (in %) of letters in a given language. For example, in an average Croatian text, the letter A is the most frequent letter. It occurs about 92 times in a thousand-letter text block. The most frequent English letter is E and it occurs 97 times in a thousand-letter text block and so on. One of the obvious conclusions that can be derived from the data in the character frequency table is that although differences are obvious, most of the first 10 characters (the ones that matter most if typing speed is the goal) are the same for all three languages which points to the possibility of Dvorak usage in Croatian and German without too much modification. To this end it is also very important that language specific letters for Croatian or German don't show up in the most frequent letters table. Such low language specific character occurrence frequencies (under 4% for 5 characters in Croatian altogether) could be a solid enough reason to merely adapt the existing Dvorak layout instead of totally rearranging it. This solution would, however, be suboptimal in several ways: the typing speed would be somewhat better than using the qwerty layout, but not as good as it could be, the right hand little finger could be seriously strained having to control 6 or 7 keys and possibly others. Aside from the just described Dvorak-qwerty hybrid solution, it would be possible to suggest a completely new layout, custom made to fit a specific language. Further analysis of regional language differences and it's influence on layout usability and other factors could result in a definition of a language specific layout based on the letter occurrence frequencies and hand alternation. Figure suggests one possible solution for Croatian. Figure 2. A half-way solution for a Croatian Dvorak layout  The problem of suggesting a national layout is partly simplified by using letter keys of the Dvorak layout as a starting point. The basic idea is to sort all the letters in English and in Croatian by their occurrence frequencies and place a Croatian letter in the place of an English letter with the same occurrence frequency index. At the same time, vowel keys should still be limited to the same five keys in order to enable hand alternation during typing. To follow both guidelines as much as possible, vowels are separated from the consonants and then assigned to keys according to their respective occurrence frequency indexes. Since Croatian has more letters than English, the letter F (the rarest letter in Croatian) wasn't assigned a key. The same goes for English specific letters Q, W, Y and X. Inclusion of these letters in the suggested layout necessarily implies rearrangement of special keys like -, /, =, [ and others. A measurement of special character frequencies would be of use, but a more important problem would be choosing alternative letter locations. The qwerty solution for Croatian suggests combinations including the AltGr modifier: possibly with the U and E keys to reach the square brackets and with  and ` to reach the curly brackets. Similar assignments could be done for several other symbols and so some space would be cleared for placement of the letters F, Q, W, Y and X. As the previous solution, the solution in part presented by figure 2 has some good and bad characteristics. Even thought the exact layout proposed here might not be the fastest layout for the Croatian language, the basic guidelines could very well present a basis for the best layout. While this was the goal of the whole research, it is arguably the only good side of the presented layout. The major drawback of the proposed idea is maximum localisation implying that no compatibility with the original Dvorak layout is maintained at all. Compatibility with the existing standard is an important issue but not one whose importance can be measured easily. Conclusion There is a lot of controversy surrounding the Dvorak layout. Results shown in this article suggest that it is an improvement over the qwerty layout in most respects. It is a result of research guided by the goal to achieve maximum speed without taking into account century old problems that occurred at high speed typing and so defined the qwerty layout. The key properties of the Dvorak layout are hand alternation, intensive middle row key usage and precedence of inner (index and middle fingers) over outer (ring and little) fingers. Organising keys so that these three properties are secured has two important advantages: because of reduced necessary finger movement typing is faster and less strainous. Regionalisation of the layout would be a natural next step. There are, however, a few obstacles along the way. First of all, a wider Dvorak layout acceptance would make the regionalisation effort more important: low interest for the Dvorak keyboard (especially on the regional level) at this time doesn't really support a lot of research on possibilities of application of the same ideas to other languages. From the technical point of view, research on the importance of minimum layout compatibility or standardisation and a more precise measure of relative usability for different languages needs to be done in order to define a relevant layout. Suggested further areas of research should also include an analysis of two- and three letter structures and their influence on typing speed as well as possibilities of avoiding top row  bottom row finger jumps. The results and solutions presented in this article are partly based on estimates of otherwise hard to measure factors. Measuring these factors would definitely give the results more credibility, but those measurements depend on a number of problematic factors: individual typist abilities, amount of training with a specific layout, text language, text topic, keyboard physical parameters (key resistance and size, key height...) and possibly one or two others. Precise input parameters would have to be determined in dozens of categories ("expert typist/ergo keyboard/technical text", "normal typist/regular keyboard/technical text", "expert typist/laptop keyboard/regular text" and so on) rather than one, general category. That is why these measurements were not done. Aside from the results themselves, some scientific value is provided through the presented analysis methodology. Given a more precise set of input parameters (for example, in a separate study with the goal of measuring those input parameters), results based on the formulas provided in this article would instantly provide numbers which could be analysed in a fashion similar to the one presented in this article. A single, exact number showing just how much one layout is more appropriate than the other is out of reach at this point, but however approximative the results might be, they strongly suggest that the Dvorak keyboard in its current form is significantly more efficient than the qwerty standard  the standard in dominant use today. References ABCD  A Basic Course in Dvorak HYPERLINK "http://www.gigliwood.com/abcd/"http://www.gigliwood.com/abcd/ [2/5/2004] McNamee D. Dvorak International's FAQ HYPERLINK "http://www.cse.ogi.edu/~dylan/dvorak/DvorakIntl.html"HYPERLINK "http://www.cse.ogi.edu/~dylan/dvorak/DvorakIntl.html"http://www.cse.ogi.edu/~dylan/dvorak/DvorakIntl.html [2/5/2004] Brooks, M. Introducing the Dvorak Keyboard HYPERLINK "http://www.mwbrooks.com/dvorak/"http://www.mwbrooks.com/dvorak/ [2/5/2004] Kozierok C.M. The PC Guide - Keyboard layouts HYPERLINK "http://www.pcguide.com/ref/kb/layout/alphaSingle-c.html"http://www.pcguide.com/ref/kb/layout/index.htm [2/5/2004] Rohmert W. Forschungsbericht zur ergonomische Gestaltung von Schreibmaschinentastaturen. Eggenstein-Leopol; 1982. A collection of publications in Croatian HYPERLINK "http://www.ffzg.hr/infoz/dzs/html/"http://www.ffzg.hr/infoz/dzs/popis.htm [2/5/2004] Proks Z.: A collection of publications in Croatian HYPERLINK "http://home.t-online.de/home/Zoran.Proks/"http://home.t-online.de/home/Zoran.Proks/ [2/5/2004] Fitts,P.M. and Peterson,J.R. Information capacity of discrete motor responses. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 67, 103-112.; 1964. (summary available at HYPERLINK "http://ei.cs.vt.edu/~cs5724/g1/index.html"http://ei.cs.vt.edu/~cs5724/g1/index.html) Rumelhart, D. E., & Norman, D. A. Simulating a skilled typist: A study of skilled cognitive-motor performance. Cognitive Science, 6, 1-36.; 1982. Norman, D. A. The Dvorak revival: Is it really worth the cost? Consumer Products Tech Group: the Human Factors Society. 8, No. 3, 5  7.; 1983. Norman, D.A. and Draper, S.W. User Centered System Design: New Perspectives on Human-Computer Interaction. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.; 1986. Dvorak, A., Merrick, Dealey and Ford Typewriting behaviour American Book Co, 1936. Figure  SEQ "Figure" \*Arabisch 1. The Dvorak keyboard layout Table  SEQ "Table" \*Arabisch 3. Letter occurrence frequencies in Croatian, English and German CroatianAIOENSJRTUDKML9,27,37,26,74,43,83,83,53,43,42,92,82,82,8EnglishETOAINSHRDLUMC9,76,95,95,85,354,74,64,33,232,321,8GermanENIRSTHADLUCGM148,16,65,54,74,44,24,13,92,92,92,62,32,2 rt "rtv (ذ؀vnc[SKKSCJmH sH 5mH sH CJ5mH sH CJ5CJmH sH 556CJmH sH 5CJmH sH 65 CJ650JmH sH CJ65%jUCJ650JmH sH CJ65mH sH U(CJ650JmH sH CJ65mH sH %jUCJ650JmH sH CJ650JmH sH UCJmH sH 6 CJmH sH mH sH  mH sH 5(vxz| "$&.:F  "&F*B-/41b129<˼{mmm]XOOCJmH sH PJmH sH mH sH 5CJH*EHCJPJH*EHCJCJmH sH 5mH sH 5CJH*EHCJ6mH sH 5CJH*EHCJ6mH sH 5CJH*EHCJCJmH sH 5]6UCJmH sH 5EHUjCJmH sH 5CJmH sH 5Uj9 VCJmH sH 5CJmH sH 5U CJmH sH  jU mH sH CJ<@CE FfFJJJJ`KdKKKHLNTSUVVVVVVWWX X"X$X,X@Xƺ订reVCJmH sH 65PJ]6UCJmH sH 65PJUj "CJmH sH 65PJ%CJmH sH 65PJUj z' VCJmH sH 65PJUCJmH sH 65PJmH sH PJ5CJ6CJmH sH 5PJ6CJmH sH 5PJ6CJmH sH 5PJmH sH PJ5CJH*mH sH PJ5CJmH sH CJmH sH PJ@XDXXXXXYY[[[\\ \ \|\\\\\\\\ ]](]6]B]T]b]n]~]]]]]]bdffg0h2h~hhhhhh»CJmH sH ]6UCJmH sH Uj0<CJmH sH CJmH sH UjH9 VCJmH sH U CJmH sH  mH sH CJmH sH CJPJ56 UmH sH  mH sH UmH sH CJmH sH 65PJCJmH sH 65PJ61hhhhhhiiHjVjmnPrrrJsLsNsxszs~sduŴttt_It_It+H*EHCJCJmH sH 65PJaJ6H*(H*EHCJCJmH sH 65PJaJ6%H*EHCJCJmH sH 65PJaJmH sH CJaJ%mH sH CJPJ5H*EHCJ6aJ!mH sH CJPJ5H*EHCJ6!mH sH CJPJ5H*EHCJ6!mH sH CJPJ56H*EHCJ!mH sH CJPJ56H*EHCJmH sH CJPJ56H*mH sH CJPJ56duwwwwwwwpxxxxxxxxxxxxxyy&y.y@yNyVy^yny|yyyyyyy{rtxjܐސhrvxzxԶԶԪmH sH PJCJ jUCJmH sH PJ]6CJmH sH PJ]6 CJmH sH jUCJmH sH CJmH sH PJ UmH sH  mH sH UmH sH !H*EHCJCJmH sH 65PJ=x~:<Գֳ,.´Ĵƴȴܴ(*0ĥrZrr/jU0J0J0J0JCJmH sH CJ#0J0J0J0JCJmH sH CJUU$0J0JmH sH CJCJmH sH CJ0J0JmH sH CJ>*0J0JmH sH CJ'jjU0J0JCJmH sH CJ0J0JCJmH sH CJUCJmH sH 5PJCJmH sH PJCJmH sH >* CJmH sH  mH sH CJmH sH 024fhj·  VXվvq]Nqq0J0JmH sH CJmH sH 'jU0J0JCJmH sH CJmH sH $0J0JmH sH CJCJmH sH CJ'jU0J0JCJmH sH CJ0J0JCJmH sH CJU mH sH CJUUCJmH sH CJ,0J0J0J0JmH sH CJCJmH sH CJ#0J0J0J0JCJmH sH CJU/jU0J0J0J0JCJmH sH CJǴPijUH*EHCJCJmH sH 65PJ]0J0J]56CJPJ56mH sH CJH*EHCJ]H*EHCJCJmH sH 65PJ]0J0J]56CJPJ56mH sH CJH*EHCJU$H*EHCJCJmH sH 65PJ]mH sH U0J0JmH sH CJmH sH 0J0JCJmH sH CJU'jaU0J0JCJmH sH CJ HJ` tZ:Z?jUH*EHCJCJmH sH 65PJ]0JmH sH 3H*EHCJCJmH sH 65PJ]0JmH sH U$H*EHCJCJmH sH 65PJ]HH*EHCJCJmH sH 65PJ]]PJ56mH sH CJH*EHCJUH*EHCJCJmH sH 65PJ]0J0J]PJ56mH sH CJH*EHCJH*EHCJCJmH sH 65PJ]]56CJPJ56mH sH CJH*EHCJ \^b PRTV  $,4<DLT\dlt|ϸmH sH  Hhf$H*EHCJCJmH sH 65PJ],H*EHCJCJmH sH 65PJ]mH sH U\H*EHCJCJmH sH 65PJ]0JmH sH H*EHCJCJmH sH 65PJ]mH sH < &.2:>FVZ^bfjnrvz~mH sH 4r v|."&F*B-$a$$a$ & F^]`$a$$a$$a$$a$$a$B-41b129<@CE FfFHLNTSUVVVW,X[|\$$a$ & F^]` & F^]`|\\\\\\\\\\QQ$$4F  )47474747 $$a$S$$44F  )47474747 $ \ ]]](]6]B]D]T]b]UQ$$4F  )47474747 Q$$4F  )47474747 $$a$ b]n]p]~]]]]]]]UQ$$4F  )47474747 Q$$4F  )47474747 $$a$ ]]dffg0hhPrwpxxxxx~{{{{$$$a$$a$$a$$a$ & F^]`$a$Q$$4F  )47474747 xxxxxx$$a$$$a$d$$44\R #(47474747 (xxxxxx$$a$$$a$b$$4\R #(47474747 (xyyy&y.y$$a$$$a$b$$4\R #(47474747 (.y0y@yNyVy^y$$a$$$a$b$$4\R #(47474747 (^y`yny|yyy$$a$$$a$b$$4\R #(47474747 (yyyyyy$$a$$$a$b$$4\R #(47474747 (yy{rxjztWttt+DV"F.#$\& $d%d&d'd^]`$a$ ^]`$a$ b$$4\R #(47474747 ( zx:<Գֳܴ· ` & F^]`$a$ T!q  & F^]` T!q $a$$a$$a$ & F^]`^]`$a$ `b  $$a$$" & F^]`$a$ T!q  "$,4<D=77777$$a$$$44N  9T5 #%47474747DLT\dlt|$$a$ >88888$$a$$$4N  9T5 #%47474747$$a$ >88888$$a$$$4N  9T5 #%47474747 &.2:>F$$a$ FHVZ^bf>88888$$a$$$4N  9T5 #%47474747fjnrvz~$$a$ >88888$$a$$$4N  9T5 #%47474747$$a$ ><:8$$4N  9T5 #%47474747  & F^]". A!n"n#n$n3P(203. A!n"n#n$n P T003P(2(2 0p!scpg2P scpg2P 6IW (X\xMF[3rF]IB6AZ8A>N $@ "Yկ=`1?c|HRzSJߦ?SlWO}7wOC:9|>^9_s EdrïrY5 O5(j@Hw5Rcd0q)Bv#m) rDD#j&rQ3#@䈚"GL9f"G59D rDD#j&rQ3#@䈚"GLP]ƌ뎻. pDQTd;K`j\ַW?~㍬a^.3m6!/ ެ5xն?~$R#8U8٥-9*LCqՊG[#-6G2٥XŒp$!*[\#,r#Gc-rҭr-:xihVKriZSkl6jv9*iS Wnjh}Hka o;ZE.q<#5E0mI rd\zvFr9wi#cEl!i;+ 9QVn#epdz6n)OH4bٮrzxl#ޏ9ֲ]55ǧ"أD#n(*$GB*GrΑ[TVÑ= 9s~82GfJۍOѬ9"Gp[r?Az IzHй\T ۇתm$#%otQJ. ܬ]UղX̅X-8da柏/8\ BζMXƭWXeS2 [G9rߵ+M4(r9BјGTdZ3kf$\38f`i"GRRja!gWj.#^a.;'9ʊf/GFh;ZZuV/#eWM9uԖR ~xerd59mϵٳQޮ m1lUٚp?VN݂rT!#C=9^ƭ5^Rcȑvqi⨇6eEh9ʊi!ѨWˑnC$#g96@kXHlBWXp$+5{)趹T&}k@ȚUkDQTկµ0cZ JpY*5tZPƭCm*nK3ΞBr^̑-rb&M;EР5Gٙ$GwA{؛mUVRurdC3[`kIDATxm =A&?V$H@Q;CǾ"G>40&t*`p p[+YrDt.{5a!*J=UU;ZRw@Sepq宼bZ^St*Z4^_FNb~0أop5a1أo`d>;e14EpE}D%X.F"i̦=h*C1r}# n+.S*L>^6pƴp}ݭbŴOf1أT1ϟ?GʐC|[j">S R9jG_j TNn[pN-KjeOeAۇK9ۭjU_TO q.H*1Hp i8jt(Cޑ`nZsϲGEp3XWح/;>! ɴ Pً%b<(8bsfXR1z%po %iwo+rq 7܀pp׉vd+_mJ"o -hMCD}mA)lM! GC IENDB`  "  <% f.9^chx<yoN 8?pv+a(}1fF$&Y2zғWHN10 lXRfZT.#^Q _:4g MDJ?T/#q0Z(7_W.2NK zEX&K$HE|X;]^ U>d8-_ ji4q~RcM%UJ9vO_t)MC ಓ6Blmߡ|5nH!M إ|M]ۜܟ:zW;*fmJ, +F(.)'kfmlB3WL]A\P;xxDI% YõR[aVxaRUZkكPK8vAPK20 settings.xmlr09!d$Sf dI^@S[Hrp0& >$V._V+ӻz.uDPy/]fůVą QT6H aj,:;c|mۣJG,)Pb̓ +/H/F¶WNl3ڿ>ngnnڻt芬Kld Jc&jSdpHk3ŁRL`{Py;QͿ,D| =;kVXIf'7yv۝jYor}n}mc YSGΊ 0nqHMOͤd5Őa$aT=ߒcĚ01e=^ 8Y$XFºg֔u-4f7oɘ *5ň0bT.S'M`O- CG ^)Ғ Mh 2fTF0AP"Qz5HU QPL}oE-cWd<0`\7eXyb;v+n~߷qꈟaS7c/i~1nb?f(]uy^1YҘz Y9 㐀dv,uKbƤ$uAT`thBNW5Piad'ɈjEAϣp9 z*MRtCl"ź VgHxZWEɨZ/BIWQXACq#ꂅ'|,kg>E@PKQCY)PK20META-INF/manifest.xmlj0 V(q k:lKaǐ(!M `7[HO/C4&@oB¾z֏^E>v[5ux9nQH:א  6前}Sȴ܂෦ ‘9.alS@j:ד&ԺZ5:55xI'oj>\ҝ^GY@?u`0 R_Duisy'PKO)PK20amimetypePK208vA Bcontent.xmlPK20QCY) jsettings.xmlPK20O)META-INF/manifest.xmlPK' MHFK7zsoffice.StarMathDocument.6Embedded ObjectbPK20amimetypeapplication/vnd.sun.xml.mathPK20 content.xmlTJ@Y* Bk x;d$3:sk,ULciM8I{84R+ku #Vnw1^A dP0i3oA'V:iA )}$֘R( =2Dأ4IZJ[ݡ\1W(}먐G8dtduuE#= ž / BHxD"OXz- QB ]b?_ͩϔa>j4_0Kͧ+Ӄ-O%4|_5a iqu89`!R97F&?N+yK*wDI%bطPLU)M1m*+}OjPK88PK20 settings.xmlS0] r3A{ ۤRﯿR<=XgfSq[aMduGoN~ޗt0}{m咸p17 Rº;Nl{n5_p>5Klz,lxCnu%ZK6S9m6vv/>Oͦio:M.ɪvN4o=uM  c~8PJ l*Q;o?W(/!T^kg-|ܪKi#:Y_@V\[|9?%؂%R-ܕOVT'b͸v8FenRӧGfR`|G ʰv{oH ޡ}UXQωbbeuf2, @,"aݱSk:sQ>÷`LQo} #}bD{IUJ1f)r@&QPG'g!/|iI&a4u3*#ՠKY UH$*[Ш(Č>\~c aQCH3 yY3jَݪj*늛_hm܁:gwHK<=;u3 嵫.<+=KQO]! 8k8$ 2 AݒX1=ly-I]kz']e.{Zm0Px,UMieBX&YI2Zvijh!\Ni= &):f!vu6Vb]Q3$0? hv-w֮FIڻOE5)TKcL*v\ n}Nu#>G~3? zPKN~ Y)PK20META-INF/manifest.xmlj0 V(q k:lKaǐ(!M `7[HO/C4&@oB¾z֏^E>v[5ux9nQH:א  6前}Sȴ܂෦ ‘9.alS@j:ד&ԺZ5:55xI'oj>\ҝ^GY@?u`0 R_Duisy'PKO)PK20amimetypePK2088 Bcontent.xmlPK20N~ Y) 1settings.xmlPK20O)META-INF/manifest.xmlPK MHFK7zsoffice.StarMathDocument.6Embedded Object bPK20amimetypeapplication/vnd.sun.xml.mathPK20 content.xmlUN0O- !jD q$vk)*ąS@B0HZ@KdfٔU pAD&#tu淍}8Xl$.\x̍!@J5WXw}g4Pö!v +·V<ܽf)mL'P[h]yIE2|RqNͦ< O~f9ٴs[NގS]FdUbe'SPwQ&wDBX)Jj5qM1"$*yUM9y(Xhs3us>|$Fp0j%Ԭ`T*FE$r G-hT?SbFbb}ϱ ԡe$􊌙漬k5lT5u/6W ;$Bbf%&vAcU%0 H&kLCP$mLj[^KRD^>I9@WV!JtU{GezIj(Vd,ZqZCI΀Y]]M6XW1 ̏Z*] èQҢSQM)R5'O모2U5X0L( `J8 05yC[_;nSϑ{'{_PKX)PK20META-INF/manifest.xmlj0 V(q k:lKaǐ(!M `7[HO/C4&@oB¾z֏^E>v[5ux9nQH:א  6前}Sȴ܂෦ ‘9.alS@j:ד&ԺZ5:55xI'oj>\ҝ^GY@?u`0 R_Duisy'PKO)PK20amimetypePK20߲ Bcontent.xmlPK20X) 5settings.xmlPK20O)META-INF/manifest.xmlPKRoot Entry FCompObjjOle 1Table#Data =\SummaryInformation(HWordDocumentF"ObjectPool_37328516 MHFK7z_36141580 MHFK7z_37308548 MHFK7zCompObj SOle  properties_stream$ package_stream )CompObj.SOle 0properties_stream$1package_stream2CompObjRSOle Tproperties_stream$Upackage_streamV