Support for Alternative Layouts
This is a summary of how alternative layouts have been supported by kits such as Colevrak and Homing. It is not a discussion of alt layout performance and development, but if that interests you I highly recommend starting with Pascal Getreuer’s A guide to alt keyboard layouts (why, how, which one?). It’s a concise and comprehensive overview with links to some great sites that go deeper. He also has a separate Links about keyboards page. The Keyboard layouts doc he recommends explains layout goals and metrics in detail, summarizing the alt layouts discussed here as well as more than one hundred others. Sculpted-profile The majority of custom keycap sets are sculpted-profile (Cherry, SA, MT3, KAT, etc. - more on profiles generally here) so let’s start there. Because each row has a unique keycap shape, alt layouts require a unique keycap for each legend that moves off its QWERTY row. At first there were two The Dvorak layout was patented in 1936 by August Dvorak & William L....
Apr 23, 2024
http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Engineering_Technology/Documents/bulletins/oet62/oet62rev.pdf
According to this document, keyboards are not exempt from verification, and penalties for selling unauthorized devices can be steep: o forfeiture of all non-compliant equipment o $100,000/$200,000 criminal penalty for an individual/organization o a criminal fine totalling twice the gross gain obtained from sales of the non-compliant equipment o an administrative fine totalling $10,000/day per violation
Additionally CISPR 22 certification may be needed if you are selling in Europe.
I hope olkb and massdrop are not putting themselves at risk.
...why bring it up? Are you concerned about emissions?
I bring it up because of my curiosity about electrical engineering and the challenges of brining a product to market.
Also, the pcb is probably the only item that would fall under fcc jurisdiction and it probably qualifies as a sub assembly so it would be exempt. Now if he was selling a fully assembled board that might be a different scenario.
Pertaining to subassemblies: 15.101(e)Subassemblies to digital devices are not subject to the technical standards in this part unless they are marketed as part of a system in which case the resulting system must comply with the applicable regulations.
From the explainer document: (Note, however, that circuit boards or cards that are connected to external devices or increase the operating or processing speed of a digital device are considered peripherals.)
From these descriptions it looks like this keyboard/kit/peripheral/subassembly would fit under the description of Class A digital devices and their peripherals which means it would be subject to FCC verification.
Don't shoot the messenger.