5 Conclusions
This keyboard has been accepted quite well with the novice users who have never used Devnagari keyboard before. In our small sessions of user studies they all seem to be satisfied and were able to achieve a speed of
The keyboard has a high satisfaction factor associated with it because writing with pen on paper (in our case the keyboard) is very intuitive, powerful and efficient. It aptly exhibits the same characteristics of simplicity, naturalness and straightforwardness like handwriting.
6 Future Directions and discussions
We are currently planning to do a constrained usability study to measure the efficiency of the gesture keyboard against the other “standard” Devnagari input mechanism namely Inscript keyboard with novice as well as expert users. The aim of this proposed study is to see whether the satisfaction ratings change with these different user groups and also to compare the words per minute that we are able to achieve with this keyboard.
We are also studying various layouts (Varnmala, frequency and common
7 Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Dr. Shekhar Borgaonkar, Dr. Sriganesh Madhvanath, and Dr. Girish Prabhu for their valuable inputs and support during the project.
8 References
Chand Aditya, Ganu Ashish, Joshi Anirudha, Mathur Gaurav & Parmar Vikram (2004). “Keylekh: A Keyboard for Text Entry in Indic Scripts”, CHI 2004, April
Clare C.R. (1976). “Human Factors: a most important ingredient in keyboard designs”, Handbook of Human computer Interaction 2nd edition, page no pp
Goldberg David & Richardson Cate (1993).
Deb Dr. Kalyanmoy & Deshwal Priyendra Singh (2003). “An Optimal
Joshi Anirudha & Rathod Amit (2002). “A Dynamic Text Input scheme for phonetic scripts like Devanagari” Development by Design, Bangalore 2002
Monty, Snyder and Birdwell, (1983) & Roe, Muto and Blake, (1984). Handbook of Human computer Interaction 2nd edition, page no pp