<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Well, I am not sure if lunch is an example of multiple signs using the
same gloss. I would consider that more an example of a composite sign
(i.e. a concept expressed by more than one sign). I have a suggestion
on how that could be handled.<br>
<br>
I wonder if you could do something like this:<br>
<br>
<sign gloss="lunch" composite="yes"><br>
<include gloss="eat><br>
<include gloss ="noon"><br>
</sign><br>
<br>
Then eat could look like this:<br>
<pre wrap=""> <signbox gloss="eat" composite="no">
<symbol x="4",y="12">01-01-001-01-01-01</symbol>
<symbol x="12",y="42">04-01-001-01-01-01</symbol>
</signbox>
</pre>
The use of a "composite" attribute and some kind of insert element
could allow for composite signs. Then the computer can arrange the
signs horizontally or vertically depending on context. If however there
are some things that happen in the transition between the signs that
make up that composite sign, then maybe it will still be best to keep
it all in one signbox and just note somewhere that this sign is derived
from these composite signs, but when actually produced, some different
things happen. A classic example is the use of the "PERSON" suffix in
ASL. Depending on the sign before it, PERSON can be two handed or one
handed. For example, PASTOR (PREACH+PERSON) is generally done
one-handed, but TEACHER (TEACH+PERSON) is generally done two-handed.
They are composite signs, but TEACHER is probably a better candidate
for a composite sign like I describe above. PASTOR probably should not
be treated as a composite sign. Make sense?<br>
<br>
The issue of multiple signs using the same gloss is for example the
word "run".<br>
<br>
You might say I have a run in my hose, I am running a program, I am
running a marathon, I am running a motor, I am running behind, I have a
runny nose. Those might all be glossed with run simply because that is
the English association.<br>
<br>
That is where if I am using the word "run", the computer should be able
to show all the signs that have been glossed as "run" and then we can
choose which one fits this context. This is where glossing runs into
trouble because the semantic domains of specific words between two
languages do not necessary cover the same territory.<br>
<br>
Thanks,<br>
<br>
Stuart<br>
<br>
Stephen Slevinski wrote:<br>
<blockquote cite="midNAEOKJKHILHAJGBAFDIGAEENCIAA.slevin@pudl.info"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Hi Antônio Carlos,
The ASL (sgn-US) sign for lunch is a combination of "eat" and "noon". This
is an example of multiple signs being represented by a single gloss. Using
a signbox would look like:
<sign gloss="lunch">
<signbox gloss="eat">
<symbol x="4",y="12">01-01-001-01-01-01</symbol>
<symbol x="12",y="42">04-01-001-01-01-01</symbol>
</signbox>
<signbox gloss="noon">
<symbol x="4",y="12">01-01-001-01-01-01</symbol>
<symbol x="12",y="42">04-01-001-01-01-01</symbol>
</signbox>
</sign>
This sign can be correctly displayed for horizontal or verticle writing.
This type of gloss doesn't work with Sign Puddle. The sign will not display
correctly in verticle writing if the sign is entered into the dictionary
horizontally. (and vice versa)
The combination sign should not be entered, and the individual parts should
be entered. When using the translation, the individual glosses should be
used. So "eat noon" should be used to get the correct ASL for lunch. I
would assume that the sign for "lunch" in Sign Puddle would be the
efficiency L to the chin; a single sign.
This is another design flaw for Sign Puddle: One gloss to one sign. The
actual relationship is "many glosses to one sign" and as you correctly point
out "one gloss to many signs".
BTY, SWML-S can handle "many glosses to one sign". The gloss parameter for
the sign element accepts a comma seperated list.
-Stephen
-----Original Message-----
From: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:owner-sw-l@majordomo.valenciacc.edu">owner-sw-l@majordomo.valenciacc.edu</a>
[<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:owner-sw-l@majordomo.valenciacc.edu">mailto:owner-sw-l@majordomo.valenciacc.edu</a>]On Behalf Of Rocha
Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2004 8:05 AM
To: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:sw-l@majordomo.valenciacc.edu">sw-l@majordomo.valenciacc.edu</a>
Subject: Re: [sw-l] SWML-S export for Sign Puddle
Stephen,
Great work! SWML-S is really simple! :-) It will be easy to make it
interoperable with any other dialect of SWML that uses IMWA.
Congratulations!
I have just one suggestion that, of course, you may follow or not,
according to the needs of your project. It may be necessary, for more
extensive uses of dictionaries, to have one gloss in an oral language to
be translated into more than one sign, in the sign language.
So, perhaps it will be useful to explicitly introduce sign-boxes in
SWML-S, to be able to clearly separate those signs. I mention this
because one possible reading of your XML format is that you are
implicitly using a sign-box, encompassing the set of symbols. Allowing
explicitly for more than one sign-box may be helpful in this sense.
Of course, the decision is yours. SignPuddle demonstrates by itself
you don't need advices to do a great job :-)
All the best,
Antônio Carlos
Stephen Slevinski wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Hi list,
Becasue of the internal changes with SignMaker, it is now possible to
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->export
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">the Sign Puddle dictionary into SWML-S. This export utility will only
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->work
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">for signs that were created with the new SignMaker. Sorry for all the
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->past
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">signs - poor design choices.
SWML-S stands for SignWriting Markup Langauge - Simple. Any application
that wants to import a Sign Puddle dictionary now has a simple way to do
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->it.
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">SWML-S was created to work with the IMWA. It does not work with sss-95 or
sss-99.
I've made a hidden page that exports SWML-S for all of the dictionaries.
The page is called swml.php
You can access the page by:
dictionary-location /swml.php
Examples...
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.signbank.org/signpuddle/SGN-US/swml.php">http://www.signbank.org/signpuddle/SGN-US/swml.php</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.signbank.org/signpuddle/SGN-BR/swml.php">http://www.signbank.org/signpuddle/SGN-BR/swml.php</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.signbank.org/signpuddle/SGN-WO/swml.php">http://www.signbank.org/signpuddle/SGN-WO/swml.php</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.signbank.org/signpuddle/sgn-CH-fr/swml.php">http://www.signbank.org/signpuddle/sgn-CH-fr/swml.php</a>
There are currently no applications that import or export SWML-S. But I
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->do
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">have a preview utility on oculog.net. You can view it here:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://oculog.net/swml/dump.php">http://oculog.net/swml/dump.php</a>
If you copy the code from the swml.php and paste it into the preview
utility, you can verify that SWML-S will work and your dictionary is
portable.
Enjoy,
-Stephen
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.grisoft.com">http://www.grisoft.com</a>).
Version: 6.0.768 / Virus Database: 515 - Release Date: 9/22/2004
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!----></pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>