[sw-l] Creating SWML-S with SignMaker

[Valerie Sutton]

SignWriting List
October 16, 2004

Hello Stephen -
Thanks for informing me about the placeholders. At the moment, neither
SignMaker or SignText show-up at all, in the Mac version of Internet
Explorer...so I only use them in Mac Safari...

On Mac Safari, I open this web page:

http://www.oculog.net/signmaker/sm.php

And it does open correctly...just a bunch of those funny placeholder
question mark symbols that make you think something is wrong...but if
those are simply placeholders, then no problems!

I will try to test this later today - many thanks for everything!

Val ;-)

-----------------------------


On Oct 16, 2004, at 9:43 AM, Stephen Slevinski wrote:

> Hi Val,
>
> No symbols are missing.  The broken images are just placeholders.  I
> will
> fix it so the placeholders are invisible until they are used (like
> signMaker).
>
> In your screen print, notice that there are 5 columns each with 10
> rows: the
> 50 groups of the IMWA.
>
> -Stephen
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-sw-l at majordomo.valenciacc.edu
> [mailto:owner-sw-l at majordomo.valenciacc.edu]On Behalf Of Valerie Sutton
> Sent: Saturday, October 16, 2004 12:26 PM
> To: sw-l at majordomo.valenciacc.edu
> Subject: Re: [sw-l] Creating SWML-S with SignMaker
>
>
> SignWriting List
> October 16, 2004
>
> Stephen Slevinski wrote:
>> The modified SignMaker is located:
>> http://www.oculog.net/signmaker/sm.php
>
>> The interface for the modified SignMaker needs to be improved, but it
>> is
>> working...
>
> I know this will take time....Actually it is not working that well, at
> least on the Macintosh. The SignMaker program works very well on Mac
> Safari, for example, but this new SignText program at the moment, is
> not really usuable in any Mac browser...there are missing symbols
> etc....so...I started Virtual PC, an emulator program, and opened
> Windows XP and even in Internet Explorer on Windows XP, I got a bunch
> of missing graphics...here is a screen capture of how it looked...I do
> not envy the amount of work this must be...but I haven't been able to
> test it yet in other ways:
>
>
>
>
>