Subject: input methods and dictionaries

From: HU Bo <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 1993 12:03:29 +0200

Forwarded message:
>From [email-masked] Fri Sep 10 11:30:42 1993
Message-Id: <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked], [email-masked]
Subject: input methods and dictionaries
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 93 11:06:26 CDT
From: "HU Bo, IFT Munich, +49 89 54759129" <[email-masked]>

There are many signifficant differences between the requirements
needed in using a Chinese dictionary and Chinese input in the
computer.

The most obvious one is that we are not really unhappy
if we find a character in a dictionary in one minute. But no input
method can be accepted if it enables an input rate of 60 characters
in an hour!

Another difference is that we never mind if we found that there are
several, sometimes hundreds of characters listed under the same item
(for example, Mu4(wood), 6 strokes). But it is quite inefficient to
build an input method based on it.

Talking about the 214 radical method, the main problem for me is to
input the redical in some intuitive way. I used a CCDOS with radical
input. You have to enter a number (1-214) for a radical. Which number
then, has the radical Fish?

The input rate will never higher than 100/h if you have to count the
strokes for each character! (H,P,S,H,O,H)

..

Gernerally spoken, the input method must be more intuitive, and the
search method in a dictionary must be systematic. And: last but not
least: it is a plus in a dictionary, if there are more registers
helping you to find a character. It is quite frustrating if a user
has to switch between several input methods, trying to input a single
character!

Specially spoken, I don't think WBZX is a good search method, nor
214 radical is a good input method (or somebody tells me how I can
input the radical FISH and count the strokes of the rest within
several seconds!).

Bo