[Wikipedia-l] sign.wikepedia.org?

Thu Jan 27 18:02:20 UTC 2005

All of these notations are standardised and can be used for any signed
language. Unfortujnately, nonve of them are widespread and the only
universally understood option would be to use video clips, which is
horrendus (vrml might work too, but it's still not a viable option)

Mark

On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 01:59:17 +1100, David Gerard
<fun at thingy.apana.org.au> wrote:
> Neil Harris (usenet at tonal.clara.co.uk) [050128 01:44]:
> 
> > The important question is: what do our potential deaf users _themselves_
> > want? Then we can worry about who's going to find the motivation to
> > adapt the software appropriately to support their needs.
> > Given the choice of an underlying notation, a nice general way to
> > proceed would to be able to define a vocabulary in some notation, and to
> > then reference that vocabulary using {{template}}s, thus allowing the
> > re-use of the quite complex gestural symbols units that make up sign
> > language. Multi-layered templates could allow whole phrases or sentences
> > to be built up.
> > Presumably the Holy Grail of any such notation would be that it would be
> > expressive enough to allow the generation of sign-language animations at
> > some later date...
> 
> 
> The other important question is: to what extent is this [[original
> research]]?  A lot of small dialects don't have teribly standardised
> orthography and their Wikipedia choosing one is already likely to have a
> fair bit of [[observer effect]]. Is there a sign language with an accepted
> standardised notation already, or are we talking about inventing one?
> 
> 
> - d.
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>