[kdejute]

Thank you for the question and the supporting documents. Your concern is understandable.

First, I agree with you wholeheartedly that the "and"/"y" as well as the "or"/"ó" are part of the mathematical expression and not part of the narrative text. So, for that reason, the single-word switch indicator is inappropriate.

Second, I would also not use the single-word switch indicator for the Spanish symbol for an accented o, because the single-word switch indicator signals that what follows is a UEB symbol, and the one-cell symbol for the accented o is a Spanish Braille Code symbol.

Third, if the Spanish Braille Code symbols "y" & "ó" are transcribed within Nemeth Code switch indicators without any additional indicators, then they technically only have the meaning of their respective dot configurations in the Nemeth Code. Thus, the "y" is the 25th letter of the English alphabet, and, more troublingly (as you say), the Spanish Braille Code symbol "ó" is a plus sign.

We are left trying to use Spanish Braille Code symbols within a Nemeth Code context, and that is a no-win situation.

So, since we've got to do something, I would go with your first suggestion, under "Spanish uncontracted," because it is probably the least likely to be misread. Thus, we get:

,si ,a y ,b son sucesos traslapados1
entonces _% ,p(,a + ;,b)
.k ,p(,a)+,p(,b)-,p(,a y ;,b) _:4

Please note that the ELI is not used with the As that are only in contact with one grouping symbol, because if that opening paren were not there, then the A would be unspaced from the P. This is in line with Nemeth Code section 28.a's directive that when one letter is in direct contact with only its opening or only its closing grouping sign, the English letter indicator must be used or must not be used as though the grouping sign were not present.

Regardless of how you handle this Nemeth-Spanish conundrum, a transcriber's note is in order, I think. Perhaps something like: Spanish language words "y" as well as "ó" are used within the following equation.

I hope that either my thought process or my suggestion are helpful to you. Thank you again for the question.

Braille on!
–Kyle

Attachments:

You must be logged in to view attached files.

[kdejute]

Diana,

Thank you for the question. In short, yes, what you describe is a complex fraction, because it has a fraction within a fraction all on the baseline level.

Please see section 65 of the Nemeth Code. Also, attached is an image of what it sounds like your print looks like as well as a .BRF and a WORD document that contain an appropriate Nemeth Code transcription of that print.

–Kyle

• This reply was modified 7 years, 8 months ago by kdejute. Reason: Add more information and related files

Attachments:

You must be logged in to view attached files.

[kdejute]

Greta,

Yes, there should be a space following a comma in an enclosed list in Nemeth Code.

See the examples (especially 4 and 8) under section 41.a of the Nemeth Code.

–Kyle

• This reply was modified 7 years, 8 months ago by kdejute. Reason: Nemeth Code reference for required space following a mathematical comma found

[kdejute]

Yes, I would do as you describe.

_% (ft^2") _:

–Kyle

• This reply was modified 7 years, 8 months ago by kdejute.

[kdejute]

Greta,

Thank you for your questions.

#1: Yes, for a table that consists of nothing but words and unmodified numbers, it's UEB all the way.

#2: A table that has one entry that must be in Nemeth Code is not required to have all its rows in Nemeth Code. In the example you provided (where a row heading and an entry both include material that must be in Nemeth Code and there are no column headings) I think I would suggest transcribing the body of the table all in one Nemeth bubble, with the opening Nemeth Code indicator in cell 1 on a line by itself right before the first row and the Nemeth Code terminator in cell 1 on a line by itself after the last row of the table. But I do not believe it would be wrong to enclose the fraction in the row heading in one set of Nemeth Code switch indicators and the fraction in the second column in another set of Nemeth Code switch indicators.

#3: Our Guidance does not require that (x) in "Number of Sheets (x)" be transcribed in Nemeth Code. So, there is no technical material in the column headings of the third example table you shared. You're quite right that the decimals that make up the second column's entries must be in Nemeth Code. So, you should enclose the row headings and table entries in one Nemeth bubble, with the opening Nemeth Code indicator in cell 1 on a line by itself following the column separation lines and the Nemeth Code terminator in cell 1 on a line by itself after the last row of the table.

Thank you for your questions! Please let me know if you have any follow-up concerns.

–Kyle

[kdejute]

Good day, Susan!

Yes, an opening Nemeth Code indicator must always have a corresponding Nemeth Code terminator.

Cheers!

–Kyle

[kdejute]

Trumbull,

The updated Guidance that we are discussing has not yet been published, on BANA's website or elsewhere.

Confession: I, too, have been following the updates covered in the webinar we are discussing.

Disclaimer: If your note on the Transcriber's Notes page says, "This volume has been transcribed according to The Nemeth Braille Code for Mathematics and Science Notation, 1972 Revision, 2007-2015 updates and the Guidance for Transcription Using the Nemeth Code within UEB Contexts .", then that does not include the batch of changes/updates that includes the note to only include abbreviated units of measure in switch indicators with a modified number or other technical expression.
If you are applying that batch of changes, then perhaps a more thorough note is called for.
Technically, the only official BANA guidance we have is what is published.

I'm afraid that is all the input I have at this point.

–Kyle

 

[kdejute]

Greta,

Thank you for the question; it is a common point of perplexity.

You've done it so right!

The only note I have is: In line one of your simbraille, please check the construction of your Nemeth Code terminator.

You've placed the minus symbols beautifully in this example material; you've accurately reflected print (and its intentional confusion/obfuscation).

–Kyle

[kdejute]

I apologize for the delay in my response.

Since the line-25 repetition of the label for a sequentially numbered table is in no way part of the content of the table, I would suggest transcribing the line-25 repetition of the table label in UEB with a transcriber's note explaining this set-up.

Thank you for the astute and well-researched question.

–Kyle

[kdejute]

Tung,

Thank you for the question.

Although it is inconvenient, "Adjacent angles", "Vertical angles", "Alternate interior angles", "Supplementary angles", and "Corresponding angles" are all nontechnical phrases/labels/headings.

[These phrases would be technical if they were involved in computation. In the example you included (Thank you for doing so!), the phrases/labels are not involved in computation and so are not technical. It would be rare for any of those phrases/labels to be involved in computation.]

–Kyle

[kdejute]

Tung,

If in Nemeth Code you have a long dash followed by a variable, then a space should follow the long dash. (See §42 of the Nemeth Code.)

So, for

y = __x + __

the appropriate transcription would be

⠽⠀⠨⠅⠀⠤⠤⠤⠤⠀⠭⠬⠀⠤⠤⠤⠤

Thank you for you question.

Sincerely,
Kyle

[kdejute]

Trumbull,

Thank you for the question. It, unsurprisingly, has made me scratch my head. And, I have to amend my original answer.

Considering the updated example (4) in section 11.b of the Nemeth Code, numeric indicators should not be used in work arranged in columns for addition (even when the work includes equal signs). The updated example is below and is from page 5 of the 2007 Update to the Nemeth Code.

⠀⠰⠭⠤⠀⠽⠤⠀⠢⠵⠬⠀⠔⠀⠨⠅⠀⠴
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠶⠽⠤⠀⠢⠵⠬⠆⠦⠀⠨⠅⠀⠴
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠢⠽⠤⠂⠂⠵⠤⠲⠒⠀⠨⠅⠀⠴
⠒⠒⠒⠒⠒⠒⠒⠒⠒⠒⠒⠒⠒⠒⠒⠒⠒⠒

Thus, the appropriate transcription of your example would be:

⠀⠀⠀⠒⠭⠤⠆⠽⠀⠨⠅⠀⠂⠴
⠀⠬⠀⠶⠭⠬⠆⠽⠀⠨⠅⠀⠒⠴
⠒⠒⠒⠒⠒⠒⠒⠒⠒⠒⠒⠒⠒⠒⠒

 

–Kyle

• This reply was modified 7 years, 9 months ago by kdejute. Reason: Updated response
• This reply was modified 7 years, 9 months ago by kdejute.
• This reply was modified 7 years, 9 months ago by kdejute.

Attachments:

You must be logged in to view attached files.

[kdejute]

Greta,

Thank you for your questions. I shall respond in the order you posed them.

1. Since "units" is not a member of the standard, metric, or other codified measurement system, it should not be within Nemeth Code indicators (unless it is involved in an equation or other computation).
2. When there is an omission sign followed by a unit, I would use UEB code for both in most cases.
3. In the same worksheet, it is alright, and almost inevitable, to use some UEB [square] symbols and some Nemeth [square] symbols for boxes of omission.
4. I would suggest you try to avoid it if you can do so without bending over backwards, but it is also ok to use both types of squares within the same problem.
5. The first simbraille in your attached document is almost exactly how I would transcribe that problem. I only wonder about the symbols you used for a square in UEB. Should it not be ⠰⠫⠼⠙ , where the first cell is a grade 1  indicator? (section 11.7 of the Rules of UEB)
6. I believe your suggestion about using dots 2-5 would work for the reader.

You may not be as well-versed in the Nemeth Code as would be ideal. But your questions indicate that you are doing a fiiiine job of transcribing this work.

Cheers!
–Kyle

[kdejute]

Well researched! Thank you for the follow-up.

[kdejute]

Katrina,

I would transcribe the print you shared just as you have transcribed it. You're right that the level must be specified for a fraction line or fraction indicator that is preceded by material on a different level.

⠐⠮⠩⠤⠠⠿⠣⠭⠻⠑⠘⠤⠹⠨⠭⠘⠘⠆⠘⠌⠆⠨⠎⠘⠰⠂⠘⠘⠆⠘⠼⠐⠙⠨⠭

"modified integral with below it negative infinity and above it x. Then e superscript negative fraction xi squared over two sigma-one squared [end (superscripted) fraction]; base-line d xi."

Thank you for the question!

–Kyle

[Author]

Posts