Reply To: Omissions

Home Forums Unified English Braille Technical Omissions Reply To: Omissions


Greetings, Fred.

In your recreation of your print, I see three situations.

  1. A sign of comparison is followed by nothing.
  2. A blank space is indicated with a low line.
  3. An opening and closing parenthesis are separated by a blank space.

I hope the following observations are helpful to you.

  1. UEB does not require us to use any symbol in the open space following a sign of comparison at the end of a math expression. 3.6 of the GTM touches on omission marks *in* mathematical expressions.
    • I would transcribe your examples A) and B) as follows:
      • ,a"> f"<#b"> "7
      • ;,b"> f"<"-#c"> "7
  2. 7.2.3 of Rules of UEB (RUEB) tells us, "Regardless of the length of the character in print, use one low line (underscore) .- in braille for each print dash below the line of type which indicates a blank to be filled in."
    • I would transcribe your example C) just like you did
      (i.e., ;,c"> f"<x"> "7 #h1 s ;x "7 .-)

      • Our hope is that if we follow print for the "nothingness" after a sign of comparison at the end of a math expression and for a low line where it is used in print, then the braille user will have the same text in front of them that their print-reading/light-dependent classmates and teachers will have and might be describing. If we used a low line where none appears in print, then the braille user would not have the same text as their light-dependent colleagues.
  3. If parentheses (or other print grouping signs) enclose a blank to be filled in, I believe GTM 3.6 tells us to use the visible space +. If the print grouping signs are simply separated with a space for the sake of appearance, then I would follow print and use simply a blank cell to separate the opening and closing parenthesis – thus reserving the visible space for space(s) "to be filled." If the empty/blank space between print grouping signs is a blank to be filled, then I would use the visible space for it.

In short, I agree with Cindi that the three dot 5s are not appropriate for your examples.

Please let us know if/when you have follow-up questions.