Re: Unicode & Shorthand?

From: Peter Kirk (
Date: Sat Sep 25 2004 - 15:32:15 CDT

  • Next message: Johannes Bergerhausen: "Re: Sample of german -burg abbreviature"

    On 25/09/2004 20:53, Doug Ewell wrote:

    >Peter Kirk <peterkirk at qaya dot org> wrote:
    >>If we are considering a scenario in which someone takes shorthand
    >>notes at a meeting and transcribes them later, interchange between
    >>computers is likely to be required. If this process is to be
    >>automated, a sensible way to do so would be for the minute-taker to
    >>write shorthand on to a hand-held computer's screen. This data would
    >>then need to be transferred to a desktop or networked machine for
    >>transcription and further editing. The most processing-efficient way
    >>to do so might be to transfer images, but that would be a lot of data
    >>for a record of an entire meeting, so for bandwidth efficiency the
    >>hand-held computer should analyse the shorthand and transfer the
    >>shorthand text in some kind of encoded form.
    >Is this a realistic scenario? (This is not a rhetorical question; I
    >really want to know.)
    >If this sort of workflow actually happens, or would if the encoding were
    >there, then that might constitute a valid use case for encoding
    >shorthand. But as far as I know, accurate handwriting analysis of
    >shorthand or other "normal" penmanship (not Palm Graffiti or a similar
    >scheme) by commonly available handhelds is not up to this challenge. I
    >may be wrong.
    All I can say is that there is work on progress on automatic recognition
    and transcription of shorthand on handheld computers. See for example, which
    also gives a good justification for implementing such a system, and (last section).

    Peter Kirk (personal) (work)

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Sep 26 2004 - 09:27:40 CST