When transcribing a work in UEB should the transcriber follow the Formats guideline 1.15.3 and use contractions in ALL foreign words regardless of whether it is anglicized? Or, should the transcriber follow the UEB rules 13.2 and use contractions in anglicized words (13.2.3), but not in words regarded as foreign (13.2.1)? The Note section within (13.2.1) is the inspiration for this question. "Note: It is permissible to disregard this rule provided that there are appropriate braille authority policies and guidelines in place which transcribers in your country are expected to follow to ensure that ambiguity is avoided."
The updated Braille Formats book is not yet approved by BANA. The Formats Committee is recommending that foreign words in an English context be uncontracted (following BF 2011). The UEB codebook does allow for contractions to be used...and it does allow for the governing braille authority to choose to do things differently (as you noted below). The current document for Formatting is BF 2011. Until that is updated, I suggest you follow those formatting rules when transcribing UEB. Especially since UEB does not address formatting. This would not apply to a work that is considered a foreign language document...it only applies to foreign words within an English context.
Braille formats 2011 states: (1.15.3) "Foreign language words or phrases within an English language paragraph are contracted as though they are English. Use the dot 4 accent indicator for accented letters." With that I understand that now the accent indicator is to now follow the UEB rules. My confusion is, if the Formats Committee is recommending that foreign words within English text follow BF 2011 wouldn't that mean contractions are to be used with no further expectations of change? Are you possibly referring to a version of Braille Formats newer than BF 2011?