[SignWriting] Re: SignFont

[Dan Parvaz]

> > <http://web.archive.org/web/20000902024005/http://members.home.net/dnewkirk/signfont/>
>
> Whilst I could view the text allthe graphics are broken. :-(

In fact, no linked objects (other than HTML files) are stored. I have the
fonts on my machine at home. If you are interested, you could install them
to look at the on-line glossaries. I also have hard copies of all old SF
stuff (including the original Emerson & Stern handbook), so if you are
really interested, I could make copies.

I was intrigued by SF, which provided more granularity than the 'literal
orthography,' but while I used it for transcription, some problems did
crop up. It made writing the more richly-grounded material (e.g.,
classifier predicates) a little tougher. While later verions of SF
included some more "phonetic" detail, it remained both very schematic and
language-specific, since it took knowledge of the signed language to 'fill
in the details.' I was still reluctant to let it go because it was easily
machine-readable and -searchable, and was a lot easier to handle than
HamNoSys.

Cheers,

Dan.