Depends on what people would want, what they would pay for such a module, and how many people would buy one. Like what kind of dial resolution people want or need. Could maybe fit a 15 position-per-rotation dial. Two of them and a couple of buttons perhaps.
Max input module height was said to be 3.7mm so that makes selection of components harder. The very limited height will likely also require more expensive extra thin PCBs, also makes designing and building it harder. It wouldn’t be cheap.
That sounds cool, I know it may be a bit of a difficulty on the hardware side but we’ve seen framework do unimaginable stuff before. The compactness of it all might be a problem though yeah.
Disclaimer: I have zero technical/engineering background, so I apologize in advance if this idea is ridiculous.
I know that there’s a prototype e-ink display module that’s the same size as the numpads, but I am wondering if it’s possible to make a regular display into a keyboard-sized module.
It doesn’t need to have touch input or anything. But I think for those of use who will frequently “dock” and the laptop to a larger screen + keyboard and mouse, it’ll be great to use the space that’s taken up by the keyboard for something else. Nobody needs two sets of keyboards! (Or mouse for that matter, but I digress)
I’d find it quite useful especially since the input modules are hot swappable. Imagine putting the laptop on the stand when you get home, popping off the keyboard and popping on the display so there’s a 3rd screen that can be used for sticky notes and or to-do list windows.
Alternatively, even a keyboard sized spacer module would be nice. At the very least we could either cover the spacer with whiteboard sticker and have a dry erase board, or just place a mini external monitor on top of it.
The idea of having the keyboard just hogging real estate on a hotswappable module when docked really feels like wasted potential…
The limiting factor is the interface. The pogo pin connections are only USB 2.0, so it would be extremely difficult to run any large display at framerates greater than 1Hz
It would technically be possible using a DisplayLink controller or other similar way to send compressed frames.
USB 2.0 has 32 times as much bandwidth as Netflix recommends for 4k streaming. The big challenge is achieving adequate compression without having too much latency.
As @nrp mentioned it could potentially be achieved with DisplayLink. A lot of people (ex. Here and on Reddit) have indicated they dislike DisplayLink docking stations, although I personally have had a pretty good experience when I’ve used it (although I’ve used the DL-6950, which is DisplayLink’s flagship chip, so that may be better than other chips).
The DL-195 is DisplayLink’s best USB 2.0 specific chipset. The DL-195 supports up to 1200p 16:10 or 1152p 16:9.
The DL-3500 through DL-3950 (all the same for this purpose, higher numbers have more features that would be relevant in docking stations) are the highest end DisplayLink chips that advertise USB 2.0 compatibility. They advertise up to 1600p 16:10 (same resolution as the Framework 16’s display), however it is unclear how well that will work with USB 2.0 (they recommend USB 3.0). Perhaps more importantly they use the newer DL-3 algorithm which should achieve better quality even at the same resolution and bandwidth.
There’s also intermediary products, such as the DL-4120, which may make more sense for this as they get the newer algorithm from the DL-3500 series without including extra features that are only relevant if the chip is used in a docking station. Although the DL-4120 is limited to 1080p, higher resolution requires DL-3500 (although I am skeptical of the DL-3500’s ability to do that decently with USB 2.0).
Ok, now you two have me waiting a 2nd screen. 
Now I’m also kinda wanting something like the Asus Rog Zephyrus Duo 16.
Top half (where keyboard and numpad would normally be) replaced with a screen, bottom half (where trackpad would normally be) replaced with a keyboard + a numpad sized trackpad beside it.
Although I expect that doing something like that in a non-janky way would likely have very high initial startup costs, so it would only make sense if whoever did it expected to sell a lot of them (and I am skeptical they would).
I’ve learned so much!!
As someone who has been forced to use DisplayLink due to using a Pixel Phone, I can understand why many people hate it. It’s okay for viewing things but the lag and overheating causes it to be good for just reading articles and scrolling sites and not much else. I suppose it’ll really depend on what the “second screen” is used for.
Although I wonder, if we’re talking janky DIY solutions, instead of the screen module being powered by the actual input connectors, maybe just attaching a display panel that’s connected to one of the USB C expansions ports via a short wire would work. So that input module bay is really just a physical holder for the screen…
But I suppose if the keyboard is bothering me that much, it might just be easier to build a “tablet pc” version (or something like this) using the 16" mainboard…
If a display isn’t really possible down below, I’d love to replace the entire trackpad area with an e-ink display and/or a drawing tablet. And then use the space for the two thin trackpad spacers as a small trackpad.
One feature that I would really like to see on the Framework 16 is full sized arrow keys, not the half sized keys currently offered.
I propose that this could be achieved by putting the down, left, and right arrow keys on the track pad module. That would allow for what is currently the up and down arrow keys to be replaced by just an up arrow key. The current left/right arrow keys could be replaced with page up and page down.
This could be sold as a trackpad input module that includes keycaps to replace the keycaps normally on the keyboard module. This would allow for compatibility with all existing keyboard input modules while only requiring one new SKU.
Here is a quickly edited image to show what I’m thinking:
To address some responses I anticipate:
This only works if the track pad is centered under the keyboard: Unfortunately this is the main flaw with this idea. However for people that do want the track pad centered under the keyboard I think this is the best way to offer full sized arrow keys. The other main solutions I’ve seen suggested have major downsides.
Laptop key caps aren’t normally designed to be user replaceable and could be damaged: This is true, however I have popped out and back in at least a dozen key caps across four different laptop models from three different brands without any kind of issue. I hope the same is true with the Framework 16’s keyboard.
Putting a full sized up arrow key cap in place of what is supposed to be two keys could require high actuation force (if the key cap connects to both key switches) or result in a wobbly key (if the key cap only connects to the top or bottom switch): I don’t expect the wobble (if the key cap only connects to one switch) to be super noticeable, however if it is then I think it would be okay for it to connect to both switches and have high actuation force.
Unfortunately I have neither the expertise nor the tools to make this, however if someone (maybe Framework?) does make this I would buy it.
Thoughts?
First though, I like it!
Unfortunately, subsequent thoughts that pop into my mind are reasons I don’t think it will work… 
Including what seems to be a dealbreaker. There are tracks that take up the space under where it seems you placed the arrow keys.
Nrp said the trackpad module uses a “different interface”.
From something said elsewhere I suspect it might be i2c instead of usb. If this is the case, it could make custom modules for the Touchpad area no longer straight forward.
You might feel it works fine & is worth the risk of breakage, but I wouldn’t expect Framework to agree. You might have had good luck, perhaps skill, in removing laptop keys without damage, but others aren’t so lucky. If I recall, one person who did it on the Framework-13 to create a mixture of transparent & non-transparent keys mentioned breaking a few in the process.
This is unlikely to be possible mechanically. However what would be possible is building a Medium size Input Module that has the navigation cluster on it as an alternative to a Numpad. This would be within reach of community development as well.
The angle of the photos makes it hard to tell, however I think it looks like those barely extend upwards so there may be enough room.
When I receive my batch 1 Framework 16 I will hopefully be able to measure the clearance issues of those and report back here.
Edit: When I wrote this I hadn’t yet seen that @nrp replied that it is unlikely possible mechanically. I’m still hopeful but this probably won’t happen.
The idea that users could mess something up and cause damage to the device is one of the reasons I have seen used to justify laptops that are tightly integrated and not user friendly to repair or modify.
IMO the best solution to issues like this would be for Framework to educate end users about the risks and provide tips for how to do it with minimal risk, like they’ve done in the past with other situations. Not to decide against doing something that a meaningful number of people want (I’ve seen other people request full sized arrow keys in other threads) just because it has risks associated with it.
I think there is definitely a technique to it.
With my Thinkpad keyboard the trick seems to be to use something thin (I often use my fingernail) to gently pull up on one of the top corners until it produces a slight pop noise, then to repeat with the other top corner, and then wiggle it a bit and it comes off.
With other techniques I can feel it requiring a lot more force and putting more strain on the key. I suspect that if Framework made this they could minimize risk by including advice on techniques they’ve tested to be most successful.
This point would likely mean that Framework would not want to sell it, as they wouldn’t want to encourage users to replace keycaps if they also state that it can damage your keyboard to replace keycaps.
I think many of us would be happy if we would be able to implement or use any thinner android phone as hw extension to Framework laptops. Question is that - would it be possible to share the phone features with the hardware and switch between, or use as a kind of “lapdock” solution and run android desktop mode on the Framework laptop? Would it be possible to embed into the chassis my phone and shut the lid down without gap? Where would be enough space, on the right, or at the touchpad part? TIA
If your phone is thinner than 3mm maybe, otherwise not without major modifications.
Not sure about the Framework-13, but the Framework-16 offers 3 .7 mm!
Think of the possibilities opened up.
This changes everything!
It would be interesting to have an encased touchscreen module, that connects and uses the cellular modem within the machine. Maybe.
