Sign Language Via Cell Phone

QuatumCrypto writes "A project is underway at the University of Washington to enable real-time sign language communication via cell phone. Because of the low-bandwidth wireless cell phone network, a new compression scheme is necessary to capture only the bare essential components of signing to minimize data transfer. Although text messaging is a viable alternative for everyone, signing — like speech — is a much faster and more convenient form of communication."

Comments

no subject

[UnixSphere]

"What is the benefit over txt messaging?"

Sign language is much faster obviously, and sign language is based alot on the user's emotions and how they use a certain sign or signs.

But to answer the parent's question, none of the cell phone carriers offer a price break for deaf/hard of hearing users.

BUT the deaf community is fond of using the t-mobile sidekick, all versions, because of the relatively cheap unlimited txt/data plan that comes with it. Sidekicks are almost dominant among deaf people. Some deaf tech sites and companies offer the sidekicks significantly cheaper to deaf users since it is so popular among them.

Re:TTY?

[KlaymenDK]

What is the benefit of this technology over TTY or using text messaging? I don't know what you or the GP means (in a mobile phone context) by TTY, but there is one definite benefit: immediateness. That is, lack of latency in message delivery.

When you send text messages back and forth, there's a delay with every delivery. For the equivalent of speech, this would be like calling the moon. Plus, you have to go into the inbox and open new messages all the time -- not very conversation-like or, for that matter, IM-like.