[Wikipedia-l] sign.wikepedia.org?

[Shane Gilchrist Ó hEorpa]

David,

At the moment, very little - but its slowly growing at the moment.

Shane

> -----Original Message-----
> From: wikipedia-l-bounces at Wikimedia.org [mailto:wikipedia-l-
> bounces at Wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of David Gerard
> Sent: 28 January 2005 14:57
> To: wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] sign.wikepedia.org?
> 
> Shane Gilchrist Ó hEorpa (shane.gilchrist.oheorpa at francismaginn.org)
> [050129 01:38]:
> > David Gerard:
> > > Shane Gilchrist Ó hEorpa (shane.gilchrist.oheorpa at francismaginn.org)
> > > [050128 09:43]:
> 
> > > > 3. There are 3 "sign-writing" systems out there - Sutton Writing
> System,
> > > > Stokoe Notation System and HamNoSys (Hamburg Notation System) but it
> is
> > > felt
> > > > that the Sutton one will become the most popular as its simple to
> use
> > > and
> > > > easy to use - whereas Stokoe and Hamnosys are more used by academics
> > > (deeper
> > > > note-keeping really)
> 
> > > Can they be machine translated with usable accuracy? (Even as much as
> > > Simplified Chinese and Traditional Chinese?) That would help a *lot*!
> 
> > (by machine) from English to the Sutton SignWriting - yeah - but from
> > SignWriting to English, I don’t think so.
> > It will take us a while before we can reach an agreement on this.
> 
> 
> I meant between each other - Simplified and Traditional Chinese are
> *mostly* a one-to-one correspondence between characters (with a few dodgy
> bits). Do the three sign systems have a 1-1 or mostly 1-1 correspondence?
> 
> 
> - d.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l