From: suzmccarth
Message: 5679
Date: 2005-08-31
> But also Michael's arguments is equally clear and correct: (1)due to a
> bunch of historical reason (which we don't need to go intonow), we can
> assume that *ANY* person who is literate in Vai *AND* wishesto use a
> computer *IS* also literate in some language (probablyEnglish, the official
> language of Liberia) written with an alphabetic script,I disagree. Creating keybords with this in mind puts computer
> capable of performing the overmentioned analysis, and (2) dueto the
> socio-economic situation of Liberia and of the Vai speakingcommunity,
> potential users cannot afford to have computer industryproducing keyboard
> hardware specifically built for Vai.implementing a Vai
>
> From Michael's arguments (1) and (2) *follows* that
> keyboard as an alternative software driver running on top of astandard
> "QWERTY" (i.e. English) keyboard hardware is the optimalsolution for the
> needs of Vai users, and that's why he favors this approach.powerful and
>
> In a hypothetical world where Vais where (a) a very numerous,
> rich community which (b) had never in their history beencolonized by
> peoples using alphabets, a different approach could bepreferrable to
> implement a Vai keyboard. In *that* hypothetical world..."alphabet"
>
> > At least by now you seem to be tacitly admitting that the
> > might be the Arabic one.English
>
> Why not? Technically, it could also be the Cyrillic alphabet... But
> is the official language of Liberia, and US English keyboardsare cheaper
> that Arabic keyboards, so perhaps English is a better choice.nothing impedes
>
> And, anyway, as this approach requires no hardware changes,
> to implement variants of the input method targeted to variouslayouts, e.g.
> US QWERTY, US Dvorak, UK QWERTY, French AZERTY,Arabic in all its national
> variant layout, etc.
>
> --
> Marco