Subject: On Chinese Input Methods (cont.)

From: Don Huan <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1993 17:28:22 -0800

> One or two thoughts in response to these postings.....
> _____________________
>
> ....The best official record (to my knowledge) for International
> >> Chinese input competition is 171.4 Chinese characters per minute held by
> >> Ms. Ho Sep 18, 1992 in Peiking using Dayi.  (maybe there are newer record
> >> since then)
> >> Many many Chinese computer users could input Chinese at a rate over 100
> >> cpm right now.
> >
> >> James Li
______________________

> >        The previous post makes me think of two questions.  Records are
> >fun and I enjoy them as much as anyone, but my question is what is
> >the average person going to expect?  In other words, what is the
> >'Words Per Minute' for the average ...
> >
> > Ed Hughes
> ____________________

My thoughts exactly, Ed.  That's like saying the world's record for typing
English is something like 153 words per minute (I can't find my Guinness
Book of World's Records now to say exactly but just throwing up this number
for discussion sake) and saying that many, many people can type over a 100
wpm.  We netters know that that's a ridiculous statement, especially when
we type firsthand to participate on the Internet.  And although there are
people who can type >100 wpm (actually, I knew someone who could and her
daughter could at one time type a bit over 90 wpm) we know that these
people are not common.  Professional secretaries are employed at >65 in the
US, and office clerks at >40.  I type at about 40-45 wpm when I practice,
concentrate and have to meet deadlines, but the errors....Like Ed, what
about the average?

Citing the exceptional, placing it at the forefront and basing one's
argument on it is a faux pas.  And then to go on and say that "many, many
Chinese users can input Chinese at a rate over 100 cpms" seems overly
exaggerated and generalized.  This distorts the broader reality of the more
commonly shared problem of inputting Chinese for most people (including
Chinese, and especially for Westerners), that it is time-consuming and
cumbersome, rendering people less productive.

John offered an explanation stressing how the differences between the two
worlds in thought processes and Chinese language learning has created a
major roadblock in the quest to develop thee Chinese input method...
______________________

> The most natural input method for a "latin" person, even if he has achieved
> fluency in Chinese, is likely to be phonetically  based, but that may not
> seem natural to someone who in childhood viewed words not as concatenations
> of phonetic elements but as sequences of brush-strokes with a phonetic
> value attached.
>
> This psychological aspect of the question is in my opinion very important,
> especially as Europeans and Americans are involved in the development of
> Chinese software and input methods.  The question is whether the Westerner,
> who perhaps began learning Chinese at the age of 16 - 20 is competent to
> make judgments regarding the relative efficacy of input methods which are
> designed mainly for the use of people who began writing Chinese at the age
> of 5 or 6.
-----------------------
This is a very intelligent comment.  It's definitely a `must' consideration
for any Western developer of Chinese software and input methods.
-----------------------
> There are obviously ways of comparing various input methods in purely
> scientific terms -- eg. two keystrokes per character are better than five,
> but there are other considerations.  Two keystokes are not better than five
> if it takes three seconds to do two keystrokes and only two to do five.
> The speed of the human brain and the training of the individual's brain is
> crucial.
>
> The lady (I guess is was a lady!) who could enter 174 characters per minute
> using Dayi must have the sort of brain that thinks very graphically.  Not
> everybody thinks in that way, no matter whether they are educated in a
> Chinese environment or an alphabetic environment, so the fact that the
> "record" is held by a person using Dayi is no recommendation a priori for
> that input method.
>
>                             John
---------------------------------------
Plus the lady(?!) practiced and practiced for an international competition.
The event sounds like a sort of an "Olympic" competition for a golden
keyboard!

So theoretically, in regards to input speed and differences in Chinese
language thought processing, we consider time and the number of keystrokes
to input, time and the number of strokes to graphically input, or some
variation, right?  And whatever way is simplest for the "average" fluent
user to grasp, use and quickly input would thus probably be the method
most successful (assuming the "average fluent user" is targeted.
Well...where does the technology of handwriting recognition fit into this
discussion.  Imagine...

Handwritten chinese character recognition seems to be the logical step.
It's the most "natural" way for the average fluent user to input.  It
is not biased to cultural differences in language thought processes since
it would recognize the strokes, number of strokes and radicals.  This method
would open up an even larger user market because Chinese characters are
used by non-Mandarin speakers of other dialects, and by overseas Chinese in
other countries.  People learning Chinese as a second language could
use it and Japanese could use it with Japanese software.  (I wonder how the
Japanese are doing with this technology?).  Also, we wouldn't have to rely on
phonetic and tonal distinctions to get the character we wanted.  The pad or
screen would have a grid defining the area which the character must be
written within, much like character sheets we're familiar with used for
practice writing.  And with the software we could also customize the size of
the grid.  All the user would have to do is simply write.  We could have a
pop-up Windows menu and to edit, choose a scalable font of our liking, eg.,
Song or Grass, Simplified or Classical, etc...

To find a character, pinyin and bo-po-mo-fo could be used. Keyed in (like
now) or written in a specially designed space on the pad-screen, a
display line at the bottom/top/side of the pad-screen would give you the
set of characters from the corresponding inputted phonetic sound and tone.
All one would have to do is tap the pen on the character and that character
would occupy the square to be filled with a tap on the square.  Otherwise,
one could possibly drag the character to the square.

Of course, handwriting recognition technology would need to be further
--much further--developed, but it seems possible to do this in the
foreseeable future.  Also, people would have to write clearly and somewhat
neatly like children so that the character can be identified correctly.  I
would think that the problem that Apple's Newton, Casio's Z-7000, Sharp's
PI-7000 and the rest have in identifying handwriting would be similar
to that of identifying handwritten Chinese characters and bring slowdowns
which we originally wanted to avoid.  But with further advances, those
problems would eventually be ironed out.

Perhaps, more importantly, where "Newton" technology has failed to bring a
strong identifiable need-purpose-use for itself, the need for a better
method of Chinese character input may prove to be more compelling.  And the
many electronic-computer/software mega-corporations will not turn their
heads from such a potentially large and profitable market.  With the
question of affordability, even Apple, Casio, Toshiba and others have
made the prices of their handwriting recognizable products within reason,
so affordability of a "Chinese" version could also be brought down within
reason(?)

This discussion has gone off on a tangent from its initial query of
finding a way to protect a new idea for Chinese input.  The idea, as I
recall, stemmed from a netter who had a dream of inputting Chinese using a
new "programming skill" which he dared not share for fear of losing his
proprietary rights.  I responded by suggesting that he document everything
with time and date and get a lawyer specializing in proprietary matters and
rights if he's truly serious.  I told him to weigh the costs and benefits
of getting exclusive proprietary rights and suggested him to consider
alternatives as well, such as freeware, copyleft and shareware.  I'm not a
computer whiz, just a user...nothing technical.

Then a netter quoted me out of context (which he failed to refer, that of
protecting ideas) and misconstrued my well-intentions from my mention that
all Chinese inputting methods are relatively slow and time-consuming,
making users less productive.  Maybe the choice of modifiers was mishandled
and that "all" and "slow", should be "most" and "cumbersome".  But I did
not appreciate being put out of context nor the comparison to Mr He's 181.7
wpm on Dayi as an example.  I was going to leave it, but couldn't help
myself when I saw two netters discuss this extreme input record.

I usually make messages very brief.  I know this is lengthy.

        Don