kdejute
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Susan,
For number lines, which are a way of representing spatially the relationships between numbers, a tactile graphic (or raised line drawing) is best.
Since both we and the Guidelines for Technical Material exist in the real world, where tactile graphics can be prohibitively expensive and time-consuming, tactile graphics are NOT THE ONLY way to transcribe a number line. We could use line mode to "draw" number lines with braille cells, as long as we're careful to use the appropriate indicators (arrow mode, line modes, numeric indicators, etc.) so that the braille reader is alterted when something represents a line to be "traced" and not a symbols-sequence to be "read." Nonetheless, it is BETTER TO DRAW number lines 99% of the time, including your examples.
Does that address your concern?
–Kyle
I believe the attached file represents a workable transcription of your example that follows the decisions Lindy outlined.
This thread is completed here: https://www.nationalbraille.org/forums/topic/sets-of-numbers-r-n-z-2/#post-34902
Yes, that attachment helps a lot. You are correct that your print is using the "double struck" or "blackboard bold" typeface for letters that refer to sets of numbers (e.g. ℝ for real numbers, ℤ for integers, ℕ for natural numbers).
In a transcription using Nemeth within UEB, in instances like you describe, it is considered best practice to switch into Nemeth Code for double struck letters wherever they appear and to use the Nemeth Code script typeface for such double struck typeface (with the typeface substitution explained in a transcriber's note).
Please let me direct you to Lesson 7 of the Provisional Revised Nemeth Course Manual, posted by NFB [especially 7.10 and Example 7.5-1, including the commentary before it] for more discussion and examples.
–Kyle
Could you please explain your question and/or example more?
Even better, could you attach a scan of the print you are transcribing?
The Nemeth Code gives provisions for letters (including those that refer to a set of numbers) partially based on how they are printed (e.g., regular type R vs. "double-struck R").
–Kyle
Laurie,
Oh, I remember the networking manual. Thank you for sending a sample.
I am on board with your decisions to:
- use a transcriber-defined typeform for the font specific to computer notation in this text
- transcribe the computer notation in grade 1 mode
- retain print's apparent distinction between regular and bolded computer notation font
- indicate braille line breaks that occur where a space appears in print by using two dot 5 continuation indicators
May I suggest that the print line breaks (e.g., before "hostname", "line con 0", etc.) in the printed computer notation are significant and so should be reflected in braille? Other than that, I think it looks good, and the braille reader will be able to make good use of this transcription. And, I think it looks sustainable; that is, I think you can be consistent throughout your transcription without bending over backwards or writing yourself umpteen reminder notes.
–Kyle
In your print equation (y equals the fraction "negative 1 over 3" x-squared minus 2x minus 3), since the fraction includes something other than "digits, decimal points, commas or separator spaces" (GTM 6.1), it cannot be a "simple numeric fraction." So, for this fraction in which the numerator and denominator are on different levels in print, we must use the general fraction indicators and general fraction line. I would transcribe the whole equation as follows.
⠰⠽⠀⠐⠶⠀⠰⠷⠐⠤⠼⠁⠨⠌⠼⠉⠾⠭⠔⠼⠃⠐⠤⠼⠃⠭⠐⠤⠼⠉
Thank you for the question!
–KyleGood day, Fred.
Thank you for the question. First, can you please confirm that you are transcribing this Chemistry material using only UEB?
Second, will you please confirm that the attached files represent the print that you are asking about? And/or will you please share a scan of the print page(s) you are working on?
Thank you!
–KyleSusan,
Thank you for asking. Please let me direct you to the following locations in the GTM – Guidelines for Technical Material (PDF) – for information "direct from the horse's mouth" about the signs you brought up.
- The "bar over" and "simple right-pointing arrow over" are given in the list at the beginning of GTM section 12
- ⠱ (dots 156)
- ⠘⠱ (dots 45, 156)
- The "horizontal birectional arrow" is on page 63 of the GTM in section 13. Information about the "directly above indicator" is discussed in GTM section 7.9
- ⠳⠺⠗⠕ (dots 1256, 2456, 1235, 135)
- ⠨⠔ (dots 46, 35)
- The "angle sign" is in the list at the beginning of GTM section 11
- ⠸⠪ (dots 456, 246)
Attached is a document with transcriptions of specific sections from your sample print page.
Cheers!
–KyleThank you for the questions. I understand those to be:
- Using only UEB, in a spatial calculation that includes lowercase letters, how should grade 1 be indicated for those letters?
- Using only UEB, does any kind of grade 1 indicator need to be used for the visible space in a spatial calculation?
In short, my answers would be:
- In your example, which includes only two lowercase letters, which are located in the top row of the spatial calculation, I would use a grade 1 symbol indicator immediately preceding each individual letter. And I would reference Rules of UEB section 6.9.3 ("... any lowercase letter a-j [in a numeric passage] is preceded by a grade 1 indicator.")
- No.
Please see the attachments for braille, images of the print, and some additional commentary.
If you have any follow-up questions or points of discussion, please do share them here. Goodness knows there can be more than one correct way to do it.
–Kyle
I see what you've done here, and it seems to get the information across. In the attached PDF, I've noted a few probable errors (mostly typos, and one note that, to the best of my understanding, the effect of a capitals indicator will not continue over/through the underscore).
Reading the rectangles (regular or 'calculator rectangles,' printed with rounded corners) within rectangles within rectangles, I admit to having struggled to unpack (hence my color-coding for proofreading in the attached file), but I think the information is there and consistent.
Braille on!
–KyleHmmmm. Could you perhaps use the EBAE underscore ⠸⠸ (dots 456, 456) within Nemeth Code switch indicators? I don't think I can provide more specific feedback without seeing samples of your braille transcription.
–Kyle
Laurie,
Keep on brailling on! Thank you for asking for input on your challenging project. I do not envy the work you have to do in order to make consistent and clear decisions about code switching (or not switching) for computer commands, IP addresses, and large charts.
For the Binary/Hex/Decimal Conversion Chart you specifically asked about, your test transcription does tidily include all the print information. And I agree wholeheartedly that your segmented binary numbers should be in Nemeth Code.
Inconveniently, I would say that all numbers from non-decimal bases should be inside code switch indicators, because the Nemeth Code includes explicit and specific rules about transcribing non-decimal base number systems (see NC §13). ... It does seem that the best transcription of the Chart in question would put all of the table into Nemeth Code.
I think that in order to transcribe in Nemeth Code all the rows but not the columns of a multi-page table in strict accordance with the Guidance for Transcription Using the Nemeth Code within UEB Contexts you would have to terminate Nemeth Code on line 25 of each page and reopen it following the column separation lines. However, there is an argument to be made that you could open Nemeth Code in the chart's opening box line, uncontract all your column headings (perhaps shortening them to "Decimal" "Hexadecimal" and "Binary"), and terminate Nemeth Code in the chart's closing box line.
Looking forward to your further questions as you continue to work through this book,
Kyle
