Online Handwriting Recognition, Pen Computing, and Shorthand Alphabets with discussion of the Xerox

1
Online Handwriting Recognition, Pen Computing,
and Shorthand Alphabets(with discussion of the
Xerox v Palm patent infringement case on the
Graffiti alphabet)

• Charles Tappert
• Pace University, New York, USA

2
Summary

• Part 1 An Introduction/Overview of Online
  Handwriting Recognition and Pen Computing
• Part 2 Shorthand Alphabets Prior to Pen
  Computing
• Part 3 Shorthand Alphabets Used in Pen
  Computing
• Discussion of Xerox v Palm Patent Infringement
  Case
• Future Research Possibilities in Pen Computing

3
Conclusions

• Online handwriting recognition
• Although we have had many advances in recent
  years, the unconstrained handwriting recognition
  problem has not been completely solved

4
Conclusions (continued)

• Xerox v Palm Patent Infringement Case
• Started 1997 and settled out of court in 2006
• Palm paid Xerox several million which may have
  just covered Xeroxs legal expenses a clear win
  for Palm
• Validity arguments were made that the patent
  was invalid many prior art alphabets (both pre
  and post pen computing) used
• Single-stroke symbols
• Small number of basic shapes, many prior-art
  shapes used by Xerox
• Infringement although the patent was considered
  valid with a scope narrowed by the invalidity
  arguments, further arguments were made that
  Graffiti did not infringe
• Graffiti designed for ease of learning similar
  to Roman alphabet, many different symbol shapes,
  variations allowed for many symbols
• Goldberg alphabet designed for speed of input,
  small number of basic shapes, maximum symbol
  separation (maximal shape overlap 50 compared to
  maximal Graffiti shape overlap 90)

5
Research Possibilities in Pen Computing(See
Tappert/Cha Research Ideas)

• Wiggliness extend M.S. thesis work
• Chatroom shorthand extend M.S. thesis work
• Numerous forensic study possibilities
• E.g., Handwriting Style Identification
  Manfredis DPS dissertation