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(a)halo-17.net> wrote: -- SI HOC LEGERE SCIS NIMIVM ERVDITIONIS HABES QVANTVM MATERIAE MATERIETVR MARMOTA MONAX SI MARMOTA MONAX MATERIAM POSSIT MATERIARI ESTNE VOLVMEN IN TOGA AN SOLVM TIBI LIBET ME VIDERE

Craig Franklin wrote: He seems to say in that link that he *doesn't* claim any ownership of the writing system itself. In any case, the free to use for anybody sort of license is basically like the "BSD-style" licenses (or cc-by without -sa), which is compatible with both the GFDL and the general free-content philosophy. -Mark