[Wikipedia-l] Sample ASL/English entry

[Mark Williamson]

How is it that computer-generated videos are not generally accepted?
Their level of proliferation is extremely low, for one, so it's not
like they've had much of a chance.

Second of all, even though it may not be perfect, sign-synthesis
technology is certainly at such a level where it should be
comprehensible to anybody.

Perhaps rather than asking Kennisnet if they're willing to host
content in signed languages, you should ask if they're willing to host
over a terrabyte of data for every signed language in Wikipedia.

And the further issue that signed language boundaries and spoken
language boundaries don't always coincide is a major one. What of ASL
users in Mexico? Would it be user-friendly to make them use a
bilingual English-ASL Wikipedia?

Mark

On 16/09/05, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
> Kelly Martin wrote:
> 
> >On 9/16/05, HHamilto at doe.k12.ga.us <HHamilto at doe.k12.ga.us> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Videos could be stored on the Commons and linked to from the English text
> >>page but the video file size limit would need to be increased dramatically
> >>from 2MB. The sample video in the link above is about 1.5 minutes and is
> >>16MB.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >You are kidding, right?  You want a 16MB video attached to each
> >article in enwiki?  That would take up, what, about 10TB?  Are you
> >going to pay for that storage array?  How about the added bandwidth?
> >
> >ASL (like all sign languages) should be a text encyclopedia written in
> >a generally accepted orthography for ASL; users who cannot read the
> >orthography (illiterate users) may utilize tools to generate
> >computer-generated signed videos from the text, the same way that an
> >illiterate English-speaking person may use a speech synthesis tool to
> >have an article in English read to him.
> >
> >Kelly
> >
> Hoi,
> The question of cost is something that is something that should be
> seperate from this discussion. In the past I have informed the Wikimedia
> community that Kennisnet would be willing to undertake the streaming of
> content for Wikimedia. I did ask Jan-Bart if Kennisnet would be willing
> to host signed content. I have not had an answer yet.
> 
> Many organisations are willing to spend a considerable sum of money to
> help people like the deaf to have the resources that other people take
> for granted. The idea that because of the "cost of video" we would not
> be able to do these things is therefore premature. The conclusion that a
> signed language needs to have an orthography is not necessarily correct.
> Mark has informed us quite correctly that many deaf people do not know
> how to write their signed language in one of the representations of
> signed languages. Technically I am not sure that you can call them
> orthographies.
> 
> There is *no* generally accepted orthography for any of the signed
> languages. Even the computer generated videos are not generally
> accepted. Calling people who cannot read one of the "orthographies"
> illeterate is a bit of a stretch. Typically illitereate is used for the
> inability to understand the pervasive written language. Typically this
> would be written English in America. When you require people to write
> one of the "orthographies" in order to contribute to an ASL wikipedia,
> you will disqualify most of the people who can sign ASL. This means that
> what you want a Wikipedia to be (the ability of everyone to contribute)
> a dream. "I have a dream ...."
> 
> Thanks,
>     GerardM
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
> 


-- 
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