Despite their increasing capabilities, SW [1] digital editors (SW-DEs) are far from granting the user a sign-composition interface capable of challenging the simplicity of the pen-based handwriting approach.
At present, any SW-DE developed so far relies heavily on “Windows, Icons, Menus, Pointer” (WIMP) interfaces. Working with deaf people for many years, we observed that SW users are far more accurate, fast and comfortable when using the paper-pencil approach, than when dealing with the (more or less) complex interaction style of a SW-DE.
Observing the state of the art in SW-DEs, we laid the foundation for SWORD (SignWriting Oriented Resources for the Deaf), a project towards the full integration of deaf people in the digital society. SWift [2][3], a new SW-DE, was produced within SWORD, but it still carries most intrinsic shortcomings of its peers, including the strict dependency on WIMP interfaces.
Within SWORD, we also conceived a new generation of SW-DEs, able to partially overcome the concept of the WIMP interface and to move along the line of the so-called “natural interfaces” [4]. The new tools are meant to relieve the user from burdens related to clicking, dragging, browsing on the User Interface (UI) during the SW production process, and to provide an interaction style which is as similar as possible to the handwriting approach.
Of course, since WIMP is currently the most common interface style, it cannot be totally left behind, because the interaction with most application is still firmly grounded on it. Nevertheless, our aim is to limit its use, or to dismiss it whenever possible, during the SW production process, which is the core part of any SW-DE. To achieve this goal, we are designing and implementing a SignWriting Optical Glyph Recognition (SW-OGR) engine (Fig. 1). Its aim is to perform the electronic conversion (recognition) of user-produced images containing handwritten (or printed) SW glyphs into machine-encoded (via ISWA) SW texts [5]. Such texts can be stored using the same formats of the documents produced by SWift, and therefore allow the same statistical and linguistic analyses. In particular, introducing a SW-OGR engine within an existing SW editor, such as SWift, will allow the user to handwrite symbols on the composition area, rather than searching them among thousands other symbols. Each handwritten symbol will be processed and replaced with its standard ISWA version by SW-OGR.
Fig. 1: Screenshot taken from SW-OGR during the development phase (ongoing). The image shows a handwritten text (courtesy of ISTC-CNR) and the result
of the detection routine for the head symbols
The main difference between OCR and OGR is in the nature of SW: SW is composed by an extremely high number of symbols (about 38,000, compared with 26 letters of the Latin alphabet) in a multilinear/two-dimensional arrangement, without rigid rules for such composition and with a complex segmentation, particularly when handwritten. Due to the large amount of patterns to recognize, and consequently to the overwhelming training required, it is not feasible to exploit traditional pattern-matching or machine-learning approaches. Therefore we are adopting an approach based on geometric and spatial features of the glyphs.
[1] Sutton, V. (n.d.). SignWriting for Sign Languages. Retrieved from https://www.signwriting.org/ on November 13, 2013.
[2] Bianchini, C.S., Borgia, F., Bottoni, P., De Marsico, M. (2012). SWift - A SignWriting improved fast transcriber. In Proceedings of AVI2012 (Capri, 21-25 May 2012).
[3] Bianchini, C.S., Borgia, F., De Marsico, M. (2012). SWift - A SignWriting editor to bridge between deaf world and e-learning. In Proceedings of ICALT2012 (Rome, 7-10 July 2012).
[4] van Dam, A. (1997). Post-WIMP User Interfaces. Commun. ACM 40(2), 63–67.
[5] Borgia, F. (Exp. 2014). Informatisation de forme graphique des Langues des Signes: application à l’écriture de SignWriting. PhD thesis, Universitè Toulouse III - Paul Sabatier, Toulouse, France.
2016 Presentation 53 Home For
Deaf Children
Education, Peru
Kristina Tworek
2016 Presentation 54 SignTyp Database
Research, USA
Rachel Channon
2016 Presentation 55 FSW Formal
SignWriting
Software, USA
Steve Slevinski
2016 Presentation 56 SignWriting in
Tunisian Deaf
Education, Tunisia
Laajili & Balti
2016 Presentation 57 Parallel Corpora
Software, Brazil
Alex M. Becker
2016 Presentation 58 Deaf Writing Skills
Education, Portugal
Jorge Manuel Pinto
2016 Presentation 59 Bilingual Deaf
Education, Brazil
Almeida & Júnior
2016 Presentation 60 Bilingual Deaf
Education, Brazil
Daniele Bózoli
2016 Presentation 61 SignWriting
in Unicode
Software, USA
Steve Slevinski
2016 Presentation 62 SignPuddle 3.0
Software, USA
Steve Slevinski
2016 Presentation 63 Peru Sign Dict
Research, Peru
Miguel Mondoñedo
2016 Presentation 64 Sign Wikipedias
Literature, USA
Valerie Sutton
ASL Presentation by
Adam Frost, Jason
Nesmith, Holly Sharer
& the CODA Brothers
Plus special video on
Tunisian Sign Wikipedia
by Mohamed Ali Balti
2017 Presentation 65 SignÉcriture: A
Decade of Writing
French-Swiss
Sign Language
Education,
French-Switzerland
by Anne-Claude
Prélaz Girod
2017 Presentation 66 The Sutton
SignWriting
Standard of 2017 Software, USA
by Steve Slevinski
2017 Presentation 67 The Writing of Grammatical
Non-Manual Expressions
in Sentences
in LIBRAS
Using SignWriting
Research, Brazil
by Joao Paulo
Ampessan
2017 Presentation 68 Sign Language Writing:
SignWriting as a
Tool in
Deaf Literacy
Education, Brazil
Fernando Carneiro Priscila Bartoletti
2017 Presentation 69 SignWriting Presentations
at the ICONIL in
Bacabal,Brazil
August 2017
by Adam Frost & Marianne Stumpf
2017 Presentation 70 2 Brazilian
TV Programs
on SignWriting
on TV INES,
Brazil, 2017