suzmccarth wrote:
> --- In, "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@...>
> wrote:
> >
> > Do you think Richard Sproat's main criticism, that the last chapter
> > didn't include a discussion of the computer technology available in
> > the early 1990s, is valid?
> Not at all. It is only in retrospect that the impact of innovations
> are really understood. To have the above comment as a 'main
> criticism', something you have left out, is surely a high accolade.
> After all, every discussion of anything leaves something out.
> It disturbs me, however, that the most common way to keyboard most non-
> alphabetic scripts is with the roman alphabet and transliteration.
> I would prefer to see a greater effort put into glyph-based
> keyboarding. Chinese is the only script which has full functional and
> standardized phonetic keyboarding as well as many innovative and
> workable methods for glyph-based entry. Q9 was even tested on mentally
> handicapped children in HK and found to be successful.

Most of the Chinese contributors to sci.lang don't like and don't use
pinyin input -- it's too slow and inefficient.
Peter T. Daniels grammatim@...