[sw-l] FOR SANDY: New Fan Handshapes

Charles Butler chazzer3332000 at YAHOO.COM
Wed Nov 24 16:46:13 UTC 2004

Query Sandy, and everyone,

On generating a handshape from data, is you still have to select it.  How could you do that quickly, as a word processor does, from data driven alone?

>From Valerie's IMWA rules, I could see a program being able to assemble from the IMWA codes a handshape, an orientation, and a palm facing, as they are directly linked to the code and one would need a Graphic Interface to manipulate the various parameters that make up the IMWA.

Since her rules are clearly defined, it might be possible to make the IMWA self-generating for a new handshape, if one can work out, in principle, that "x finger" on "y" base can only be written one way in the IMWA.  If we can agree to that in principle, then a "generating" system would work that would enable Valerie to no longer have to actually create picture by picture 96 drawings for any new handshape.

Sandy Fleming <sandy at FLEIMIN.DEMON.CO.UK> wrote:
Hi Val!

Thanks, these look great!

Your lessons on how handshapes were made were very interesting. A while ago
I tried devising a non-graphical scheme where any handshape could be
expressed using up to 16 pieces of data - it wasn't very hard to do but I
imagine that it's already been done.

I'm wondering, do you think it's possible for a computer program to be
written that would generate handshpe graphics from data? This would be a
better solution for wordprocessors, instead of having to have the IMWA
downloaded, which is huge. But are the rules for drawing handshapes
consistent enough to make this possible?


> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-sw-l at majordomo.valenciacc.edu
> [mailto:owner-sw-l at majordomo.valenciacc.edu]On Behalf Of Valerie Sutton
> Sent: 20 November 2004 16:55
> Subject: [sw-l] FOR SANDY: New Fan Handshapes
> SignWriting List
> November 20, 2004
> Dear SW List and Sandy:
> A long time ago we discussed some new fan-like handshapes, as shown in
> the attached diagram. Numbers 1 and 2 in the diagram are new handshapes
> that will be placed in the IMWA in the future, but number 3 is already
> in the IMWA. Do these seem readable, Sandy? Thanks for your
> suggestions for new handshapes - Val ;-)

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/sw-l/attachments/20041124/b46597cf/attachment.html>

More information about the Sw-l mailing list