[sw-l] SWDB - Linguistic SignWriting Database

[Sandy Fleming]

Val wrote:

> Thank you for this message, Dan. I am not a programmer, so I do not
> understand what you said below, but that is ok. The only thing that
> works with me is showing me a sign written in SignWriting...I assume
> that you are not saying that symbols should be written with colors? As
> you know, we have written symbols with colors for Deaf children...that
> worked very well. But you are talking about how to program a sign with
> one hand on top of the other? Would it end up looking the same as it
> does when we write? That is all that matters with me...

Val, you won't really be able to have any control over colours. One day
someone will write a sign processor with the sort of flexibility available
in Word, OpenOffice, AbiWord and other state-of-the-art word processors, ie,
the user will be able to choose the colour of text (IMWA symbols) he wants.

All I'm suggesting is that he could choose his own colours for different
layers, which could be garish contrasts or subtle shading.

He could also chose to have the subtle hairline around the upper shapes,
either instead of or as well as different colours, if that's what he wants.
He would probably also be allowed to choose the thickness of this line for
himself. Also whether the symbols shouls be opaque or transparent - the
programmer, not the IMWA, does it all.

> Meanwhile, I am happy to create symbols in the IMWA in any format
> requested...and I will leave the programming techniques to all of you -
> Many thanks for your input -

My opinion is that the IMWA is at its best in its present form and you would
be wasting your time, because one day all these variations will be applied
automatically.

All we need is the z-layer (depth or layering) information defined in the
SWML, which should be very easy to do.

One thing you need to understand is that just because the gifs in the IMWA
are in black and white doesn't mean they have to be black and white in word
processors and other programs. The programmer can get the software to change
the gifs in any way he wants. Similarly, adding a fine white hairline to the
gif might not be helpful because the programmer could have the software add
it automatically.

The gifs in the IMWA define a sort of basic form for the symbols, but the
programmers might alter this in any way for display or printing.

It's possible that a "hairlined" IMWA would have programming advantages over
the current IMWA, but this needs to be thought through by programmers, I
think - is it easier to have no hairline and add one programmatically, or is
it easier to have the hairline and remove it programmatically? Should the
hairline be a colour of its own so that it's easily distinguished as a
hairline? These questions are for the programmers who are actually doing the
work to answer, I suppose, not myself!

Whatever you do, keep backups of all versions of the IMWA in case one turns
out to cause more problems than another in practice!  =:|

Sandy