Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!liverpool.ac.UK!KPURCELL From: KPURCELL@liverpool.ac.UK (Kevin 'fractal' Purcell) Newsgroups: comp.society.futures Subject: Re: Handwritten vs typed input Message-ID: <9004110951.AA13009@encore.encore.com> Date: 11 Apr 90 09:14:50 GMT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU Organization: The Internet Lines: 83 On 10 Apr 90 15:01:18 GMT Paul F. Doering (rochester!kodak!doering@edu.cmu.cs.pt) said: >We're getting involved here in a debate on the merits of the handwriting- >recognition capabilities of the newly announced Sony Palmtop portable >computer. [deleted] >Character-recognizing interfaces turn me from a data- >enterer into a proof-reader, and the handwriting interface is by far the >worse from that perspective. Consider the process: I draw a character. While >I am drawing the next (or at least THINKING about drawing the next), the >system is trying to recognize my input. It then makes its best guess >about my intended input and displays that guess. At the very moment my mind >is looking forward, the system requires that I look backward to confirm the >system's recognition. Counter-human. Why should the machine recognise stuff character by character. When I write I tend to think in complete words and write them down in one operation. If a a computer uses handwriting recognition for input then there is know reason that it shouldn't try to recognise complete words (the technology is already here -- look how many people have fairly good spelling checkers these days). This would also reduce the amount of mistakes in recognising letters, especially if the common diagrams and trigrams are taken into account (a la typo on Unix systems). A combination of shape, connectivity, velocity, timing, and pressure (using a pressure sensitive stylus) and these higher level processes should lead to remarkable accuracy. [deleted] >Gary, I haven't solved your problem. Itty-bitty keyboards are truly a >bad approach to input. I say that handwriting recognition is no better, >but for a different reason. Can we admit that we don't have a solution? >Opting for a new bad technology over an old bad technology is progress only >for the academicians and hackers. It won't solve the user's problem, and >it won't sell computers. Most people can edit a piece of text by crossing words/letters out, moving them around and adding new text between the lines. Even my old thesis advisor could do this well, but he never liked the keyboard for input and editing. Even with a mouse you loose a lot of the direct feel for the process. Combine the flexibilty of handwriting recognition, the size of a calculator and the user interface of an Apple Mac and you could sell a lot of these to people to replace notebooks, diaries, Filofaxes. But why stop at character recognition: computer-assisted sketching will be a major application for these devices. Most architects I know (i know a few) dislike computers for the initial design work of a building. They'd much rather work on a knapkin or the back of an envelope that to use a CAD station, even if they will use CAD exclusivley later in the project. The need a device that is responsive, flexible and immediate as a pencil and paper. But imagine a device that is as good as a pencil but can then go on to tidy up the drawings, add shading (in a controlled manner), take simple measurements of the drawing, convert free hand drawings into object oriented drawings, and add components from a library of pre-drawn objects or previous sketches. And this device can be pulled out of a pocket and used on site. And so on ..... I'm sure Apple are already thinking about it. >-- > ========================= ====================================== > Paul Doering (for self) Man will never arrive, > doering@kodak.com man will be always on the way. > ========================= =============== -Carl Sandburg ======= ------T-h-e--N-S-A--p-r-o-b-a-b-l-y--r-e-a-d-s--a-l-l--t-h-i-s--s-t-u-f-f------ Kevin 'fractal' Purcell S U R F A C E S C I E N C E C E N T R E kpurcell @ liverpool.ac.uk Liverpool University, Liverpool L69 3BX God is in the strange attractors. I speak only for myself