AW: [sw-l] Frustrations of SignWriter DOS users...

[Nana Dumitra]

Hello Stefan, Val and everyone else,

I have been very quiet recently, partly due to the fact that we were very
busy, but partly also due to the fact that most of the time I had no idea
what you all were talking about :) - I am almost computer illiterate. So,
for me SW 4.4 is what I use and kind of understand, we have not yet reached
the 10.000 limit (we are at about 500 Filipino Signs), but we do use it
often and both hearing and deaf enjoy the program. We are aware that with
all the new development in the computer/software area DOS programs will
become extinct sometime, but PLEASE not soon!!
Greetings from the Philippines,
Nana Dumitra

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Tini Pel [mailto:tinipel at ONLINK.NET]
Gesendet: Freitag, 15. Oktober 2004 08:23
An: sw-l at majordomo.valenciacc.edu
Betreff: Re: [sw-l] Frustrations of SignWriter DOS users...

Hi Stefan, Congratulations !!!!!! and I agree with you 100 % with SW. 4.4
One can write, express and communicate with others in a simple way
Puddle seems fantastic and a great help, specially with the dictionary but
I do hope, we won't loose SW. 4.4. ever. !!!!!!!.

Tini.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Stefan Woehrmann" <stefanwoehrmann at GEBAERDENSCHRIFT.DE>
To: <sw-l at majordomo.valenciacc.edu>
Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2004 6:54 PM
Subject: AW: [sw-l] Frustrations of SignWriter DOS users...


> Hi Valerie and everyone,
>
> Good news from Germany ;-))
>
> Can you imagine - all of my nine deaf students age 10 - 12 (and 16 )
sitting
> at a computer. They got a picture story - and they found their individual
> solution to type their first story in GebaerdenSchrift.
> Well - they decided what to focus on. They decided what kind of style (SL
or
> signed Spoken Language) . In order to copy the signs from the dictionary
> they asked again and again for the translation of the signs which came to
> their mind. I remember the discussion about the importance of a dictionary
> in the SW4.4 program. (smile)
>  I never before had the chance to see something like this before. DEAF
> children at fourth grade are writing what they want to express. It is
almost
> the same like hearing children are able to do. Young hearing children come
> to school and write just the way they feel - and yes you can understand
> their written documents even if they do not care about the correct
spelling
> ...
>
> I am able to read the written documents of the children without any
problem.
> I translated their documents to German. So now we can discuss, compare and
> learn. I felt so happy- and yes they felt very, very happy.
>
> Now my students demonstrated pride and competence. They worked on two days
> for about 45 minutes each day. I am so impressed. So we are definitely on
> our way to improve literacy in deaf students with the support of SW..
> Without SW.4.4 with the wonderful option to choose between so many
> variations in the dictionary that would not be able.
>
> At school we need a program like the gold old SW 4.4 DOS  so badly!!  At
my
> classroom I refused to update to XP - so all our computers run under Win
98
>
> Unfortunately I have almost no knowledge and insight in software -
> programming.  There is hope that some day we will get a program that can
be
> compared to the SW 4.4 Program - with a dictionary that is not restricted
to
> a special number of entries, print - options and keyboard-design that can
be
> compared to the good old  SignWriter - keyboard. ;-)))
>
> Please do not misunderstand. I am impressed by all the programmer -
> achievements of the last few months and I can imagine that it takes a lot
of
> knowledge and time and energy and love to create all these new
> technologies -  and yes we need a different software due to XP -
> development - hm -
>
> but we need a program that allows to work with SW in this good old
procedure
> ;-))
>
> Stefan
>
>
>
>
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: owner-sw-l at majordomo.valenciacc.edu
> [mailto:owner-sw-l at majordomo.valenciacc.edu]Im Auftrag von Sandy Fleming
> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 14. Oktober 2004 22:51
> An: sw-l at majordomo.valenciacc.edu
> Betreff: RE: [sw-l] Frustrations of SignWriter DOS users...
>
> Hi Val!
>
> > Will there be a day, when Stefan will be able to type full documents
> > directly in the visual symbols of SignWriting, like we do in SignWriter
> > DOS? We can type directly without ever seeing one word or letter in a
> > spoken language...pure SignWriting documents that can go for pages and
> > pages...that kind of typing, in a sign-processor program, that can also
> > save signs into a dictionary and paste signs from the dictionary while
> > typing...and then be able to print both documents and dictionaries in
> > multiple print formats...those features have never been done in another
> > computer program...SignBank gives us some of that, but does not have
> > the typing element...
>
> I thought I'd try to explain a few things to put this in perspective.
>
> The real pity about SW-DOS is not that it's dying but that it lived so
long.
> It would have been better if SW-Java had worked out and we had had a
modern
> version of it. No matter how much anyone may have come to love SW-DOS, or
> how useful people have found it, there is probably no longer any practical
> way to expand it beyond the 10,000 limit, or make the screen as attractive
> as a modern word processor (say, by offering better layout, colours and so
> on), or achieve any sort of advancement at all. It's not just Bill Gates
> doing things, it's that modern software development processes really are
> better and programmers quite rightly think twice about trying to bring a
DOS
> program up to date - there comes a point where it starts to get easier to
> write a new thing from scratch than to try to keep improving the old one.
>
> The question was asked of whether the current suite of Web-based programs
> would ever be used to create large documetns, and the answer is no, not
any
> more than anyone would try to use a browser connection to implement a
> powerful word processor. Browser connections are slow and really have very
> litle - almost nothing - in the way of memory. This lack of memory is a
> deliberate feature of HTTP design, and so the answer is no, the Web is not
> really suitable for creating large offline documents.
>
> So you might ask why Stephen uses Web-based development for these things.
> Part of the answer is that his aim is mainly to enable everyone all over
the
> world to build dictionaries (not write documants) and for this a Web
server
> with a database is ideal. Another part of the answer is that browsers and
> servers supply a lot of programming power and very good database and user
> interfacing software just by default. This makes it possible for Stephen
to
> respond to requests for improvement very quickly: he can add new features
> without having to ask everyone to download and reinstall anything. A
> programmer writing a word processor for offline use would have to wait and
> save all his changes in a new issue, which he would have to test very
> heavily to make sure there were no errors before asking everyone to
> reinstall the new version. Web development, however, enables Stephen to
> interact with us an respond to our ideas quickly. He can experiment
without
> having to worry about wasting peoples time with downloads and
installations.
> In fact I think he added a new search feature this morning while I was
> working on the BSL dictionary, and I didn't even have to stop work for a
> moment, never mind download and reinstall everything again!
>
> This is all very valuable because as we've seen Stephen has been
developing
> at the very heart of SW technology, trying out our ideas, and these
> developments can be used in future word processors when programmers do
> develop them. The SW word processors of the future are bound to be much
> better than they otherwise would have been, due to the sort of work
Stephen
> is doing now.
>
> I would also emphasise the importance of developing good XML (ie SWML)
> applications. XML is not only very easy for programs to read and write,
but
> is also very easy to transform (or operate on). This means that it doesn't
> matter that we have different dialects of SWML - it's easy to transform
one
> dialect into another. It's easy to upgrade because if we add new features
or
> remove old ones, we can write an XSLT stylesheet to transform all out old
> data into the new form. This means our data will last forever even if we
> keep wanting to keep improving on the way it's stored, unlike the old .sgn
> data which was a fixed format and difficult to change without some serious
> programming effort. If this is too technical, I could just wrap it up by
> saying that the whole idea of using XML (ie SWML) is to make sure that
once
> a sign is in a dictionary, or once a document is written, it can be used
> again and again and changed again and again by as many different
> applications as programmers care to write.
>
> So to summarise, the web-based development currently taking place is a
very
> VERY good thing indeed, but don't expect it to end up by giving you a
> full-featured word processor. That's a separate programming concern and
> involves much longer-term development. But the new breed of SW word
> processors will be all the better for their workings and data having been
> poineered in these Web applications.
>
> Phew! And I thought I'd get an early night tonight!  :)
>
> Sandy
>
>
>