[kdejute]

When transcribing according to the “Provisional Guidance for Transcription Using the Nemeth Code within UEB Contexts” or the upcoming “Guidance for Transcription Using the Nemeth Code within UEB Context," tactile graphics can be dealt with on a case-by-case basis.

If a graphic occurs between two items that must be in Nemeth Code, then Nemeth Code should almost always be left in effect for the graphic.
If a graphic is not flanked by material that must be in Nemeth Code, then the transcriber has to determine whether Nemeth must be used for that specific graphic.
If a graphic is not flanked by material that must be in Nemeth Code, and nothing in the graphic would need to be in Nemeth mode in the text, then I would not use Nemeth anywhere in that graphic.

Alternatively, all graphics can be transcribed in Nemeth mode. In this case, a TN at the beginning of the volume should alert the reader to this arrangment, which is most useful when all or nearly all graphics in a transcription require Nemeth to be used.

If that does not fully address your question, or if you have follow-up concerns, please do not hesitate to post again.

Thank you.

–Kyle

[kdejute]

I think I must say that, in this case at least, Formats guidelines that apply to the displayed literary material and require a blank line before it do trump Nemeth formatting that says a blank line should not follow instructions.

Thank you for your incisive follow-up.

–Kyle

[kdejute]

Thank you for the question.

I suggest you treat the information that begins "All of the used hardcover books ..." as displayed literary material.

The attached file shows the formatting I suggest. Many of my decisions for this example are based on material from BANA's document Application of the Formats Guidelines 2011 to Nemeth Transcriptions.

Attachments:

You must be logged in to view attached files.

[kdejute]

Really this is a UEB and not a Nemeth question, and UEB is not my particular field of expertise.

Still, I can tell you the following:

• The use of a UEB grade 1 symbol, word, or passage indicator depends on the symbols-sequence(s) that is/are being put into grade 1.
• The numeric indicator sets grade 1 mode.
• When a numeric indicator, which sets grade 1 mode, is preceded by material, a grade 1 indicator may be needed for that preceding material. The "size" of grade 1 indicator chosen (symbol, word, or passage) depends on the extent of the preceding material.

For further information, please re-post this question in the UEB Ask an Expert forum.

[kdejute]

Yes. Yes, you are on the right track when you transcribe comments in words in UEB.

I would do precisely what you've done in the included example, using the single-word switch indicator for a comment that is only one word but closing and then re-opening Nemeth mode for any word-based comment longer than one word.

I apologize for my delay in responding.

Cheers!

–Kyle

[kdejute]

The issue here may be that there is no rigid terminology for discussing methods of transcribing technical material.

I suggest that when absolute clarity is needed, the following phrases be used:

• "transcribed according to UEB Guidelines for Technical Material"
  • (which means NO Nemeth is used)
• "transcribed according to the "Provisional Guidance for Transcription Using the Nemeth Code within UEB Contexts" or "transcribed according to the "Guidance for Transcription Using the Nemeth Code within UEB Context"
  • (which means Nemeth is used, within Nemeth switch indicators)

[kdejute]

An updated "Guidance for Transcription Using the Nemeth Code within UEB Context" is near completion and will be posted on BANA's website as soon as it is ready.

http://brailleauthority.org/mathscience/math-science.html

–Kyle DeJute

• This reply was modified 8 years, 6 months ago by kdejute. Reason: The updated BANA document is not "Provisional", and so the word "provisional" is not in its title

[kdejute]

Your follow-up information raises a good point: Including "of a yard" and "of an hour" is one thing. It begs the question of what ELSE to include (or not). At this time, I cannot provide a sweeping rule for what to include and what not to include in Nemeth mode. I can, however, offer some thoughts:

I follow your reasoning about "cup" versus "cup of water". And, by extension I would only include "cup" in the Nemeth mode that is necessitated by the "3/4". I say this because "'3/4 cup' of water", "'3/4 cup' of oil", or "'3/4 cup' of hydrochloric acid" would all be the same "3/4 cup" in volume, so the "of water" does not affect the meaning given by "3/4 cup".

Similarly, I would not include the word "array" in the Nemeth mode needed for "5×5", because 5×5 is the dimension, whether those dimensions are of an "array", a "lawn", or a "room," the dimensions would have the same value.

As with other questions concerning Nemeth material within a UEB context, it is likely that our approach to these issues will evolve as time goes on and our experience grows. Thank you for keeping the conversation active. Please do continue to share your questions.

Sincerely,
Kyle

[kdejute]

In response to your first question, I would say that "of a yard" and "of an hour" should be included within the Nemeth switch indicators that are necessitated by the fractions 2/3 and 3/4.
These phrases perform the same function that "centimeters" or "km" would if they followed the numeric measurements; they are integral to the meaning of the numbers. So, they should be included in the "Nemeth bubble" uncontracted and without using single-word switch indicators.

 

UPDATE!!!

Further discussion and consideration have led to these conclusions:

• A phrase like "of a yard" or "of an hour" is not a unit of measure like "yard" and "hour" and would not be put inside the switches.
• When a word is not directly adjacent to a number that must be in Nemeth mode, the word is not considered a unit of measure.
• Some examples
  • ".5 yard" and ".5 of a yard" would be treated differently, with ".5 yard" all in Nemeth and ".5 of a yard" having only ".5" in Nemeth
  • ".75 cup of water" would have ".75 cup" in Nemeth but not "of water"
  • ".5 bag of marbles" should probably have only ".5" in Nemeth ... because "bag" is not a standardized unit of measure

The conclusions above must change my answer to your original question. However, I urge you to do what is necessary in order to produce a consistent and clear transcription.

• This reply was modified 8 years, 5 months ago by kdejute.

[kdejute]

Good day, Susan!

For the example you sent (Thank you for the scan!), and others like it, I would suggest using square symbols of shape to represent the boxes representing omission.

This preserves the print's use of "boxes" and lets the reader know how many omissions are indicated.

Since this transcription is for a 4th-grader, the square symbols of shape should be appropriate to the student's knowledge of Nemeth.

If  you have further questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to share them.

Cheers!
–Kyle

[kdejute]

Please see the attached document. It demonstrates what the BANA Math committee proposes for Special Symbols page listings in a Nemeth-in-UEB transcription with number lines.

This reference was graciously provided by Cindi Laurent.

Attachments:

You must be logged in to view attached files.

[kdejute]

Thank you sincerely, Cindi. That is spot on.

–Kyle

[kdejute]

I'm afraid I do not know of any sample/example/template braille for Number Line symbols on a Special Symbols page.

If you do find or create one, will you please share?

I hope that all of your number lines go smoothly and well!

–Kyle

[kdejute]

The attached .BRF is supposed to be a template for listing number line symbols from the Tactile Graphic guidelines within a subsection on the Special Symbols page of a Nemeth-in-UEB-context transcription. Do you think the braille I've got will work (for the time being) as a template for such a section?

Thank you so much for your time  and input.

Sincerely,
Kyle

Attachments:

You must be logged in to view attached files.

[kdejute]

Yes! I mistyped when I said section 113.d. I should have said "111.d".

I sincerely apologize for the confusion. Thank you for being so studious and for following up.

–Kyle

[Author]

Posts