Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)
• Author
Posts
• #34706
braillebud
Participant

In the networking manual I'm transcribing (UEB/Nemeth) there are IP addresses (192.168.00.115), subnet masks (255.255.255.240), and binary representations (11111111.11111111.11111111.11000000). My question:

Is Nemeth Code required for these? They contain periods (or dots) which separate the groups of numbers, not mathematical decimal points, which is why I'm asking.

Laurie

#34715
kdejute
Moderator

I would like Lindy to weigh in on this one. Please hold for collaboration. ...

#34716
braillebud
Participant

Here's a small sample. If the IP addresses, etc. are not Nemeth, would I use the Nemeth punctuation indicator prior to the "dot" in the equation?

Convert the answer back into decimal:

11000000.10101000.01100100.01110000 = 192.168.100.112

The IP address 192.16.100.115 belongs to the 192.168.100.112 network when a mask of 255.255.255.240 is used.

#34733
Lindy Walton
Moderator

Hello. Thank you for your interesting question!

Because IP addresses, subnet masks, and binary numbers are technical terms, I would use Nemeth for all three renditions of this notation -- both in narrative context and within a mathematical expression. I would use the (46) symbol in all cases. Here is my reasoning.

I find this IP address notation (and subnets) being referred to as "dotted decimal notation" and "binary point" in binary notation, so the use of a (46) symbol for this dot is not out of line. It certainly will be smoother reading to use (46) rather than (456, 256, 3456) for every "period".

State your usage in a TN, using the terminology for the dot that is used in the print document. I would not refer to (46) as a "decimal" since that word implies base 10. For example, if the text calls it a "period", here is a possible TN: "The symbol (46, 123456, 46) represents the period used to separate groups of numbers in the IP addresses, subnet masks, and binary representations."

I look forward to your followup response.

Lindy

#34734
braillebud
Participant

Thank you Lindy. Your solution makes sense. The transcriber's note is a good way to make it clear to the reader, so I'm good with that.

Except for the fact that it was requested this way, do you see any good reason why something like this even needs to be in Nemeth Code? It seems to me UEB has everything needed to represent this material. If the reader is proficient in UEB, then what advantage is there in going back and forth between codes? I really want to understand the reasoning behind these requests.

Thanks!

Laurie

#34746
Lindy Walton
Moderator

Laurie, I'm still scratching my head on this one. I'll let you know when I find out more. Thank you for your patience!

Lindy

Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)

Everyone is free to read the forums, but only current NBA members can post. Become a member today.