SW in Webpages (technical); Was [sw-l] SignPuddle

[Stuart Thiessen]

Well, here's my 2 cents worth.

The ultimate ideal is something that uses Unicode and SWML. In my
opinion, this is the future of SignWriting when/if we can find the
resources to get it all figured out. This is not today ... yet.

The next best deal is something that uses SWML or SWML-S. Stephen is
already headed toward tools that work with this so I like this approach.
Anything that can get us away from a dependency on spoken language to
express sign language is good. This assumes no one is coding SWML by
hand. I am assuming there is a graphical input editor that allows entry
of SW which is then converted to SWML or SWML-S for the webserver to
convert to SW later.

The next best after that is something based on glossing or a modified
version of it. This could be something like <SW>ME GO STORE</SW> or
whatever.

Basically, what I am thinking is this: The goal needs to be a simple way
for people to post dynamic SW. That means that I can just tell the
webserver that I want to post this sentence in SW and when the user
adjusts their browser, the SW adjusts with it. And that it is easy to
edit if I want to change it. I don't want to have to fire up SW-DOS and
then convert to SW-JAVA and then take a screen shot, and then use my
graphics program to move the signs around and then save that as an image
that I post on my website. Right now, that is pretty much what I do.

What Stephen has done with the email is a step I haven't really looked
at, but it is a glossing approach and there are some questions in my
mind on how to set up facial expressions with the same sign or use
Parkhursts' approach for some facial expressions where you "bracket" []
the phrase with facial expression(s). How that would work in a glossing
approach is something I am just not certain so that is what has held me
back on that.

I would like to be able to edit it simply .... this could mean:

- Editing the SWML-S in a web-based editor using the SignMaker program
or some other program.
- Editing my original document in SW-DOS or SW-JAVA or SW-Edit and
having a program that converts these formats to SWML-S which can then be
interpreted by my webserver into displayed SW.

I think the 2nd option is more ideal to me because it allows us to
leverage existing tools in conjunction with the web-based media. And it
allows us to work offline for some of us who do not have always-on
internet or the technical skills to set up an offline webserver to use
the web-based tools. If I understand correctly, Antonio already has some
code that converts sgn files to SWML. So that is part of the work right
there. It is not to minimize the good work that Stephen is doing with
the web-based tools. This is a great step forward. I am just thinking of
some who may not be able to work on-line, so having some kind of
interface to existing off-line tools would be a good idea.

I think, at some point when it fits the plans, the SW-TIGER should or
could use the SWML Dictionary format so that SignPuddle and SignBank and
SW-TIGER can share dictionaries. The same could be true for data files
... Emails from SignPuddle and data from SW-TIGER could share
information based on the document version of the SWML.

For the actual display, I am thinking that for those of us who have Perl
or PHP, we could run the code off our own servers. We could give the
code the location of local dictionaries and remote dictionaries. Then,
the code could pull from the local webserver first, then search other
dictionaries as needed to post the SW. If not, then it would display
whatever the default is for when there is no dictionary entry. The use
of the language code could identify which dictionary to pull from.

If people who have no Perl or PHP, maybe there could be a way to develop
a "secured" code that can be run with permission. So the webserver calls
the function from another webserver that has PHP or Perl and also has
that function, and then the function authenticates itself and if
permission is granted, then it will retrieve the appropriate
information.  How that would work, I am not certain. Again, I haven't
thought it through to that much detail.  Maybe there is a simpler
approach. Maybe security isn't a detail, and we can just leave them open
as a published API as such. Maybe some sites that don't have Perl or PHP
might have server side includes which could allow for calling a remote
function on another server. I don't know.

These are some of my thoughts. They are not necessarily thought out to
the greatest detail, but this is how I am thinking at the moment.

Please ask for clarification if my thoughts are not coming across well
enough.

Thanks,

Stuart

Stephen Slevinski wrote:

> Hi Stuart,
>
> I've thought of writing such a library, but I am not sure of the interest.
>
> There is the broader topic of what is the best way to use SignWriting
> on websites.  There are several approaches we could use.
>
> HTML Hardcode
> Send yourself an SW email using the online images checkbox.  Copy and
> paste the HTML code.
>
> PHP Function
> Requires PHP installed on server.  This would be the translate
> function you describe.  Pass the langauge and the gloss.  Should also
> pass the style (horizontal or verticle), or use two functions.
>
> Other CGI
> Same as above, but in ASP or Perl or ...
>
> Javascript
> Create a Javascript function that would generate the SignWriting.
> This would not require any special installation on the server.  This
> would require Javascript on the client.
>
> Gloss vs SWML-S
> Should these functions accept gloss or use SWML-S?
> For dictionary entries that were created with the new SignMaker, I can
> output SWML-S.  For the other sign entries I can not.  The ASL
> dictionary needs to be almost completely rewritten, over 3000 signs.
>
> Gloss can be used immediately, but SWML-S is the superior solution.
> SWML-S will properly display verticle writing with the head in the
> center.  (I can even include lanes.)
>
> SWML-S can be built from the dictionary, but does not depend on the
> dictionary.  In a few months, I hope to have a working version of
> Movement Writer available as a Java Applet that will output SWML-S.
>
> Anyway, there are many options, but what is needed and what will be
> used?  I'm willing to write the code, not because it is possible, but
> because it will be used.
>
> Seriously, who needs what?  Speak up and you may get it.
> -Stephen

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/sw-l/attachments/20041008/05bd13b6/attachment.htm>