Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Thank you for the question. Please accept our million apologies that we missed it at first.Yes, using the transcriber-defined shapes ⠈⠫⠗⠉ and ⠈⠫⠃⠉ for the red chips and black chips pictured in print seems reader-friendly and practical, because we can use a transcriber-defined shape in both UEB and Nemeth Code contexts, according to #5 under Basic Guidance on When to Switch in the Guidance for Transcription Using the Nemeth Code within UEB Contexts (Approved April 2018).For the table example you so beautifully shared, there is one question: Might it not be more clear to use a listed table format and repeat the column headings, especially where there are multiple things to be filled in within a single row?Regardless, it is alright to use in the table a UEB shape for the gray squares that indicate blanks to be filled and to use in the math expressions that follow the table a Nemeth shape for the gray squares that indicate blanks to be filled. This is because there is no meaning to the squares other than “something needs to go here.” In other words, the student is not expected to take answers from the table and use them to complete the items after the table, so the gray squares do not need to have the same braille representation in both places.Braille on!
–KyleThank you for the question! I agree that it is challenging to determine which is the best transcription of a shape in a spatial calculation.
First, you are right that the numeric indicator that is part of the square shape is not the same as numeric indicators for numbers; so it does not need to be aligned with them. Second, within a numeric passage, the shape indicator does not require a grade 1 symbol indicator, because numeric mode sets grade 1 mode.
I think the examples in the attached image (and repeated in the attached BRF) show viable options for transcribing this spatial calculation.
——–
I cannot say anything about placement of the multiplication symbol, because that relies on what the print looks like and/or what the customer (e.g., a teacher) has requested. So, I have assumed that a) the print has the multiplication symbol to the left of the second multiplier and above the separation line.
As for alignment, no single cell of the square symbol needs to be aligned with any place value of the numbers, so I’ve simply started the shape in the first cell after the operation symbol and transcribed its components all unspaced.
Either individual numeric indicators or a numeric passage could be used for this calculation; it is up to you which works better within the larger transcription.
What do you think? Does this make sense, and will it work for you?
–Kyle
I see. There ARE numerous cancellations in that spatial problem. The whole first addend is cancelled out with four separate printed lines through its four separate digits.
Although it is tempting to use one “big” cancellation for that addend, we should do as print does (and as is mathematically logical) and cancel each number separately (using separate “line through previous item” symbols .=@:). In other words, we should use your “Example 1.”
Thank you for asking!
–KyleThe committee gives a resounding “yes” to a tactile, empty box in your number bond example. This is particularly appropriate for a 2nd grade student, for whom additional braille symbols are likely to make things harder rather than easier.
Thank you for your question!
–KyleSusan,
I would be inclined to leave the tactile box simply empty (in the number bond of item 4 in your example). Let me confer with the other UEB thinkers in the NBA committee and give you a more thorough answer as soon as I can.
–Kyle
LaVerne,
Thank you for the question and the kind words. All is well here .. And all is well with transcribing the arrows in your example using braille cells and not tactile graphics.
Yes, I would use the enclosure indicator following a square shape before the arrows (or lack of arrows) in each entry.
Thank you for sharing your question and good thoughts!
–KyleThank you for your question, Christine!
I agree that the equal sign with a dot over it should be brailled just like the description says, using “dot over previous item.” So, your equal sign with a dot over it (in your book meaning “approximately equal to”) should be transcribed as you describe (also shown below).
“7^4
If you can, will you please share in what UEB resource you found a transcription of the equal with a dot above and below and what that transcription was?
Thank you!
–KyleFred,
I agree that the examples given in Rules of UEB and Guidelines for Technical Material can leave us transcribers feeling frustrated.
No one at the National Braille Association is in a position to explain why the codebooks are they way they are, because NBA is not an organization that creates or maintains any codebooks. The Braille Authority of North America and the International Council on English Braille are the decision-making bodies for braille codes that are used in the United States and Canada. NBA is a training organization.
For what it is worth, the last example on page 32 of the Guidelines for Technical Material does include complex fractions.
In addition, we volunteers at NBA are open to members’ suggestions of topics to be covered in future trainings and professional articles.
Thank you for your input and for the hard work you are doing in the braille field.
–KyleFred,
It is difficult. If we do go down the rabbit hole of designing a non-spatial transcription of the printed horizontal curly brace, then I suspect we must make it very clear what the printed braces are “embracing.” That would be “x-squared equals thirty-six” and “x equals six or x equals minus six” In addition, it is probably not best practice to insert an opening curly brace in braille when only the closing curly brace is shown in print.
Thus, I think the following is what we would have to do:
,IF
;;<X9#B “7 #CF>.5<;’,HYPO!SIS_>1 !N
;<X “7 #F OR ;X “7 “-#F>.5<;’,3CLU.N_>where braille grouping indicators enclose the “embraced” material and a directly below indicator precedes the “pointed to” material, which is enclosed with an opening braille grouping indicator and a closing curly brace.
Whew. I prefer the spatial approach. What do you think?
–Kyle
Corrected versions of all my examples are attached.
No worries!
A tactile graphic would likely be the most reader-friendly solution. However, since that is not always possible, you could use line mode to create something like the attached (in image and braille file formats).
Thank you for the question!
–Kyle & the UEB Technical Material Committee
Yes, I see why this is challenging. Can you please confirm that the attached image roughly corresponds to your print?
