More minor index/README edits

* Took out most of the README FAQ text that was already on the web page
* Added/tweaked a couple of index page links

README.md

@@ -31,117 +31,27 @@ FAQ: LAYOUT LEARNING
 --------------------
 
 ### ☑ "Should I learn Colemak? Is it worth it?"
-	- Yes. Well, you asked. On a page dedicated to Colemak...  ¯\(º_o)/¯
-	- Longer answer: If your only concern is speed then maybe not. You can get fast with most layouts, likely including the one you're using now.
-	- "Your fingers will thank you" goes the slogan. Colemak is very comfortable and once you've learnt it properly you'll nearly certainly enjoy it a lot.
-	- While learning though, it can be unpleasant at times. So be warned if you're an impatient type. There are different ways of learning, if you wish.
-	- If you're worried about having to use QWERTY on other computers, that's usually not a big problem. You can get by, and you can even maintain both.
-	- Consider that you'll probably type a lot in your lifetime. Learning a better way of doing that should easily be worth the while.
-	- In sum, nearly everyone we've heard from who gave it a dedicated attempt have ended up saying that learning an improved layout is worth it.
-
 ### ☑ "What about Vim, or other programs that use shortcuts?"
-	- For the majority of users, that's not a problem. Many worry beforehand, but we haven't heard anyone with a little experience complain.
-	- In Vim and most other programs, most of the shortcuts are by letter. The Yank command in Vim is on the <kbd>Y</kbd> key no matter where that is.
-	- Commands/shortcuts that are positional will take a little more getting used to. Some remap them, but many prefer not to after a while.
-	- There are other navigation ways than HJKL in Vim, and they may just be better overall. [Extend][bigext] is a good example – it even stays with you outside Vim!
-
 ### ☑ "Which Colemak is better, Classical/Vanilla or Curl/DH?"
-	- It's quite individual really! There are many users of both variants, among them people who have tried both.
-	- The Curl-DH mod reduces lateral (inwards) travel for the index fingers, and helps the common HE bigram.
-	- To determine what you like best, decide how you feel about inwards stretches to D (QWERTY G) and H.
-	- Then compare with the downwards <i>curl</i> to V and M. If you prefer those, consider Cmk-DH.
-	- Individual preference and typing style (e.g., float vs grounding) may affect the choice.
-	- Both variants are well suited for both row-staggered and matrix/ortho keyboards.
-	- People have achieved 220+ WPM typing test results on both variants (Viper and Sophie).
-
 ### ☑ "Is Colemak-DH the same as...?"
-	- "...DHm/DHk, the DH mod for ANSI/ISO vs matrix/ortho keyboards, or...?"
-	- There are many names and letters floating around, let's hopefully clear this up a bit.
-	- The DH mod for Colemak is the result of SteveP's Mod-DH project from 2014. As its name says, it moves the D and H keys.
-	- It's a _Curl_ mod: It lets the home row curl down like the natural curve of fingers on a hand instead of stretching inwards.
-	- To be precise, 'Mod-DH' is the _project_. The 'Curl-DH' or just 'DH' _mod_ is the result. 'Colemak-DH' is the resulting _layout_.
-	- On a row-staggered board (any standard keyboard has a 1/4–1/2u row stagger), DH is accompanied by an _Angle_ mod.
-	- The geometrically descriptive name for Colemak-DH is therefore Colemak-CurlAngle or Cmk-CA.
-	- There is only one standard variant of Cmk-DH now, although a few have been tried out. It's the same as the original from 2014.
-	- Standard Cmk-DH has M on the home row and is thus also named Cmk-DHm. There's also a Cmk-DHk, the former standard (2017–2020).
-	- A common misconception is that the 'm' in DHm stands for 'matrix' as in matrix/ortho boards. This is wrong. I should know; I made that abbreviation.
-	- Some use Colemak-CurlAngle plus further Wide and Sym mods, which makes Colemak-CAWS. See [the Big Bag][bigbag].
-
 ### ☑ "Why is Z in the middle of the board on Angle-ANSI? Would DH work without that pesky confusing Angle mod?"
-	- "Would using one ortho board and another ANSI Angle-modded board make it more confusing?"
 <br>
 
 FAQ: LAYOUT DESIGN
 ------------------
 
-### ☑ "Which layouts are better than Colemak?"
-	- Any answer depends a lot on modeling and scoring. Individual factors and preferences become important, as with vanilla vs DH.
-	- Diminishing returns, infinite layout pool
-	- More changes from QWERTY, more keys change hands, fewer shortcuts kept
-	- Many layouts claiming superiority have more pinky movement! Also more pinky SFBs even with fewer total SFBs.
-		- Colemak places the quite common `A` and `O` on pinkies, but has little pinky movement to the other rows.
-	- Word of warning about implementation.
-
 ### ☑ "Isn't Workman/Norman/Whatever better than Colemak? Its documentation says so!"
-	- Please don't trust any layout maker's own words. There really are a lot of fairly clueless people, and even nutcases make layouts.
-	- Specifically, the Norman and Workman layout makers seem exceedingly proud of themselves and imnsho shouldn't be.
-	- For one: Both these layouts have too high same-finger bigram (SFB) stats, and their fans downplay the problem.
-	- Secondly, most users of these layouts that have studied layout design a little seem to be unhappy with their choice.
-	- Here's [Ben Vallack talking about leaving Workman](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WVmJrZF9xwk&t=245s).
-
+### ☑ "Which layouts _are_ better than Colemak?"
 ### ☑ "I want to tweak Colemak a little to suit my needs!"
-	- Unless you are an experienced layout designer, consider that you probably don't know and understand enough to do it well.
-	- On a properly optimized layout it's generally very hard to change even a small thing without breaking something more important.
-	- You need to understand typing concepts such as grounding vs float, hand and finger balances, alternation vs rolls, lateral stretches etc.
-	- You need to understand anatomical concepts such as finger strengths, interdependences and speeds, ulnar deviation etc.
-	- Same-finger bigrams is a crucial factor in layout design! You may not notice them at first though.
-		- Some say that a SFB% of, say, 0.2% for one bigram – 1 in is so little that you won't notice it.
-	- Beyond simple SFBs you have roll direction and redirects, skip-grams and whatnot. Here be dragons!
-	- Read the [Colemak Design FAQ](https://colemak.com/Design_FAQ) and the accompanying [Design article](https://colemak.com/Design) first, to learn more.
-	- "In the world of layout design there is no beginner's luck, only beginner's mistakes" ~ DreymaR, 2021
-
 ### ☑ "Wouldn't it be better to swap R and S on Colemak? It's so hard to learn!"
-	- We get this one a lot from newcomers! You won't believe how common it is!
-	- [Here's a funny video comment for you](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4qLkq6jYnJM)!
-	- See the "I want to tweak Colemak..." question above first.
-	- Simply swapping R and S on Colemak is definitely not recommended! It leads to higher same-finger bigram frequency and other issues.
-	- Ease of learning is a design property of Colemak, but should not be so at the cost of too much layout quality.
-		- Funnily enough, other layouts move lots of keys between hands and swap them around. Their learners don't complain.
-		- Colemak, on the other hand, has this one somewhat hard-to-learn key swap, and lots of learners complain since it's just that one.
-	- If you make a change to Colemak that makes it worse, you're fixing a temporary problem with a permanently inferior solution!
-	- In the [Colemak Design FAQ](https://colemak.com/Design_FAQ) Shai Coleman answers the R-S exchange question like this:
-		- It significantly reduces same-finger. This is especially important as it affects the ring finger which is the least dexterous finger.
-			- (e.g. try typing WSWSWS fast on QWERTY)
-		- It allows for W to stay in the same place. It's more important to keep the potentially destructive Ctrl+W shortcut.
-			- (Close Window under MS Windows)
-	- Since you care about initial learning, consider that hitting Ctrl+S (Save) by mistake is far less destructive than Ctrl+W (Close window).
-	- RS occurs 0.40% of the time; common for a bigram. SR occurs 0.006% of the time. It's better to roll this bigram inwards than outwards.
-	- The ST bigram too is better as it is in Colemak, and more common than TS.
-	- There are some more answers in [this R-S Reddit topic](https://www.reddit.com/r/Colemak/comments/hnfk6e/is_there_a_good_reason_for_the_placement_of_r_and/)
-
 ### ☑ "Is mapping the CapsLock key to Backspace a part of the Colemak layout?"
-	- When the Colemak layout was introduced, the layout was indeed bundled with this nifty trick.
-	- However, treating layout components as modules works better. CapsLock key behavior should be treated separately from letter layout.
-	- This is the case in Linux XKB for instance, where you can select what the CapsLock key does independently from your layout choice.
-	- Furthermore, several tricks and tools have been added to your options since the birth of Colemak.
-	- Consider using the Caps key as a powerful [Extend layer modifier](https://dreymar.colemak.org/layers-extend.html)!
-	- With Extend, you'll keep both Back and CapsLock in handy locations. It's also easy to hit Ctrl+Back with Extend, and so much more.
-	- In some implementations, the your Caps key can even be both Back on tap <i>and</i> the Extend mod on hold, as a Tap-or-Mod key.
 <br>
 
 FAQ: PRACTICAL LAYOUT QUESTIONS [WIP]
 -------------------------------------
 
-### ☐ "My right pinky gets tired! And typing `you` is uncomfortable! What's wrong?"
-	- Many QWERTY typists hardly use their right hand pinky, as the rare semicolon sits in its home row position and some type P with their ring finger.
-	- These typists may need to build up their finger strength a little to type well on Colemak. Pinky fu! &thinsp; 🥋
-	- There are layouts that deprioritize the pinkies more than Colemak. These generally aren't so good, however.
-	- There are several highly optimized layouts that have a heavier pinky load than Colemak.
-	- The `you` trigram in particular, isn't so great on Colemak. Trust me, most common n-grams are great. &thinsp; 👍
-		- This one has a so-called `redirect`, which means that it changes direction (RL then LR). That's not so comfortable.
-		- Furthermore, it uses both the weak pinky and the codependent ring finger. You just have to train it!
-
-### ☐ "How can I train my fingers to get better at typing for instance `you`, then?"
+### ☑ "My right pinky gets tired! And typing `you` is uncomfortable! What's wrong?"
+### ☑ "How can I train my fingers to get better at typing for instance `you`, then?"
 	- At the [Big Bag Training page][bigtrn] there are tips for training hard n-grams. Try a list of words containing 'ou uo yo oy uy yu'!
 	- If you have a programmable keyboard you could make a chord for hard n-grams. E.g., press 'yu' at the same time for 'you'.
 
@@ -159,6 +69,12 @@ FAQ: PRACTICAL LAYOUT QUESTIONS [WIP]
 FAQ: LAYOUT DESIGN ANALYSIS [WIP]
 ---------------------------------
 
+### ☑ "I want to tweak Colemak a little to suit my needs!"
+	- Same-finger bigrams is a crucial factor in layout design! You may not notice them at first though.
+		- Some say that a SFB% of, say, 0.2% for one bigram – 1 in is so little that you won't notice it.
+	- Beyond simple SFBs you have roll direction and redirects, skip-grams and whatnot. Here be dragons!
+	- "In the world of layout design there is no beginner's luck, only beginner's mistakes" ~ DreymaR, 2021
+
 ### ☐ English bigram frequencies from [Norvig/Mayzner](https://blogs.sas.com/content/iml/files/2014/09/bigrams.txt):
 	  ##: Bigram	##: Reverse 	Sum  	Ratio | - Comment
 	=======================================================================================================
@@ -186,12 +102,12 @@ FAQ: LAYOUT DESIGN ANALYSIS [WIP]
 		  NK: 0.052%	KN: 0.051%  	0.10%	  1.0 | - NK/KN is easily alt-fingered with index-middle fingers
 
 ### ☐ SteveP's SFB analysis using the colemakmods analyzer:
+	- SFB frequencies on the Colemakmods analyzer:
 		Colemak                     	1.669%
 		Colemak (angle-cheat)       	1.789%
 		Colemak-RS                  	2.034%
 		Colemak-RS (angle-cheat)    	2.044% 
-
-### ☐ Thoughts:
+		
 	- So the difference is bigger than 0.24% in this analysis
 	- is that due to the difference between Norvig/Mayzner and the carpalx (which I use) datasets?
 	- I've always thought that if people are determined to swap RS, then they should do a FL swap as well:

docs/index.html

@@ -160,7 +160,7 @@ <h3>COLEMAK-DH WITHOUT THE ANGLE MOD?!?</h3>
                 <li>Secondly, many users of these layouts who have studied layout design a little seem unhappy with their choice.</li>
                 <li>Workman was created to address Colemak's lateral index finger travel to <kbd>D</kbd> and <kbd>H</kbd> (see DH vs vanilla). It did so poorly.</li>
                 <li>If you do dislike lateral travel, Colemak-DH achieves the same thing without sacrificing layout quality.</li>
-                <li>Here's Ben Vallack talking about leaving Workman: <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WVmJrZF9xwk&t=245s" target="_blank">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WVmJrZF9xwk&t=245s</a></li>
+                <li>Here's <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WVmJrZF9xwk&t=245s" target="_blank">a video by Ben Vallack in which he talks about abandoning Workman.</a></li>
             </ul>
         </div>
     </div>
@@ -261,7 +261,7 @@ <h3>COLEMAK-DH WITHOUT THE ANGLE MOD?!?</h3>
                 <li>The <b>YOU</b> trigram in particular, isn't so great on Colemak. Trust us though: Most common n-grams are great.</li>
                 <li>This word has a so-called <i>redirect</i> on Colemak, which means that it changes direction (RL then LR). That's not so comfortable.</li>
                 <li>Furthermore, it uses both the weak pinky and the codependent ring finger.<br></li>
-                <li>TL;DR: Nothing is really wrong. You just have to train it!</li>
+                <li>TL;DR: Nothing is really wrong. <a href="https://dreymar.colemak.org/training.html#ngrams">You just have to train it!</a></li>
             </ul>
         </div>
     </div>