I'm curious as to what makes it look best to you as far as intelligibility. Most of the information available about Stokoe is obviously biased due to the fact that it's actually FROM the SuttonSignWriting website.
Stokoe and HamNoSys are very easy to write using computers, and can use fonts and normal text rather than special markup languages. (clustering "sig" characters in Stokoe present a difficulty, but not an impossibility, for the average font-founder)
Text in HamNoSys can be used to generate signs in a virtual reality environment in real time, thus widely increasing the usability scope (most deaf people can't read in signed languages, but being able to watch an article, even as it's edited and undergoes drastic changes, would be a definite plus).
Text in HamNoSys can also be converted on-the-spot to Stokoe or SignWriting (to Sutton SignWriting would be difficult, but then so is any programming involving Sutton SignWriting).
Stokoe has no copyright.
HamNoSys might be copyrighted, I'm not sure.
SuttonSignWriting is definitely copyrighted. Even though they allow for it to be used free of charge, it's not a "free" writing system and I think that it wouldn't be very Wikimedia-like to use it as the primary writing system for any Wikipedia.
Now, I have said the thing regarding on-the-spot signed language generation in at least 4 separate e-mails to this list. Nobody has responded to any of them. People continue to draft proposals or ask questions which would easily be answered by reading my e-mails.
Now, I know that some people have blocked my address; that's their problem, even though they're wasting everybody's time by asking questions which have already been answered or drafting proposals without seeing mine first. But quite a few of the people in this thread have responded to other e-mails by me quite recently, and in the most recent case, somebody actually responded to my response to their e-mail, in which I told them I'd answered all of their questions earlier.
This is one of those cases where it would save everybody time, energy, and inbox space to read all of the e-mails in any thread to which they intend to contribute.
Mark
On 14/09/05, Craig Franklin craig@halo-17.net wrote:
Scríobh Phil Boswell:
I wondered whether it could be possible to create a SignWriting extension
to
Mediawiki, along the same lines as WikiHiero, which used SWML as the
source.
This would at the very least allow us to display the signs in articles
about
them, and might provide some sort of kick-start for more extensive usage.
SignWriting looks like the best system as far as intelligibility goes, but isn't it copyrighted? I mean, I know that the creator has made it free for use and all (see http://signwriting.org/about/questions/quest0004.html ), but doesn't that still make it ineligible for use in a Wikimedia project? It would be like using a special copyrighted ortography for English, or a copyrighted conlang (Toki Pona, anyone?).
Yet another issue that must be addressed, I suppose.
Cheers,
- Craig [[en:Lankiveil]]
Craig Franklin PO Box 764 Ashgrove, Q, 4060 Australia http://www.halo-17.net - Australia's Favourite Source of Indie Music, Art, and Culture.
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l