[access-uk] Re: PenFriend Update
- From: "Carol Pearson" <carol.pearson29@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <access-uk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 22:59:35 +0100
I think there is only one spot on each label though where you can place the pen
to get a reading. If this is the case, then you'll never get four identical
labels by cutting them.
--
Carol
carol.pearson29@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Twitter: http://twitter.com/songbird49a
---- Original Message ----
From: Dean Wilcox
To: access-uk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2009 10:44 PM
Subject: [access-uk] Re: PenFriend Update
> The RNIB don't need to clarrify, it was me who started it
> after all. If you cut a label into four then you have
> four of the same label, no doubt about it. The original
> point I was making is that if you are leaving labels
> unused in the pack because they are too big for what you
> want to use them for then this is a way of putting them
> to use. It may be that you only use one part of each
> label and discard the other three pieces, it may be that
> you use the four identical labels made from the one label
> to label identical things like beans, where each piece of
> label goes on the same kind of item. I hope I'm clearer
> this time.
>
> At 22:35 13/10/2009, you wrote:
>
> Well, that's my understanding also David. We'll wait for
> the RNIB to clarify or disagree with this.
>
> --
> Carol
> carol.pearson29@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> On Twitter: http://twitter.com/songbird49a
>
> ---- Original Message ----
> From: David Russell
> To: access-uk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2009 10:01 PM
> Subject: [access-uk] Re: PenFriend Update
>
> > But you cannot use them for four different tins. If you
> > record on the second part of what was once one large
> > label it will change what you put on the first part. If
> > the penfriend thinks that large label is sausage and you
> > change it to beans, then the first label used becomes
> > beans as well.
> >
> > I hope I am not being really stupid here.
> >
> > John or alison please correct me if I am talking
> > rubbish.
> >
> >
> > David
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: access-uk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > [ mailto:access-uk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Dean
> > Wilcox Sent: 13 October 2009 21:11
> > To: access-uk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: [access-uk] Re: PenFriend Update
> >
> >
> > Yes, they are identical, just one label made into four.
> > The advantage is that if you have a lot of large labels
> > that you don't want to use because the smaller ones suit
> > the task you can at least make them usable. What you do
> > with the three remaining bits of each label is something
> > else, I'm sure if you saved them they could come in use
> > in the future. Or maybe you have many of the same
> > tinned food and want to use them for beans, peas, tomato
> > soup, tuna etc.
> >
> > At 19:52 13/10/2009, you wrote:
> >
> > But, surely, if you cut a large label into four, they
> > will all say the same thing when you activate them with
> > penfriend?
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: access-uk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [
> > mailto:access-uk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Dean Wilcox
> > Sent: 13 October 2009 19:27
> > To: access-uk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: [access-uk] Re: PenFriend Update
> >
> > Its worth saying that in the RNIB's Penfriend tips sheet
> > it does say you can cut the large labels into four to
> > make four identical labels. Hopefully that will help
> > some.
> >
> > At 23:09 11/10/2009, you wrote:
> >
> > I think tins may stack better if labels (so a fairly
> > long strip) could be put down the side of each tin
> > rather than on top. I personally do like to be able to
> > use larger labels for some items (especially where I've
> > given more verbal information than just a name).
> >
> > To give us choice seems to be the right way to go, but
> > maybe, eventually, you should be able to provide a whole
> > pack of each size so that we have a choice when
> > ordering. Some may find that they don't use a
> > particular size of label and would prefer not to have
> > to buy one.)
> >
> > --
> > Carol
> > carol.pearson29@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > On Twitter: http://twitter.com/songbird49a
> >
> > ---- Original Message ----
> > From: John
> > To: access-uk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2009 6:21 PM
> > Subject: [access-uk] PenFriend Update
> >
> > > Hello Everyone,
> > > We are in the process of defining the spec for our
> > > PenFriend magnetic labels. These are for use with tins
> > > obviously as well as things like sticking on the
> > > fridge for messages or other appliances to remind you
> > > what knobs to press.
> > > So we are interested in your views as prospective
> > > customers.
> > > You can send comments privately to me or Alison of
> > > course but we'd quite like to see a debate develop
> > > where ideas and concerns can be bounced around on the
> > > list.
> > > We would be interested in basic things like size and
> > > shape. How big should they ideally be and would there
> > > be any benefit in having a specific shape or range of
> > > shapes or sizes? how many recordings you might want
> > > to put onto one label and anything else you want to
> > > say about them. This is not a scientific survey and
> > > we will be using other means to hear from other
> > > potential customers but the folks on this list have
> > > always been very creative with suggestions for the
> > > Penfriend and you don't just tell us you are grateful
> > > for anything we offer you. Believe it or not we like
> > > customers who challenge us because that's how things
> > > get improved. Our supplier has told us we should get
> > > our first sew on label samples for the laundry in a
> > > couple of weeks from China.We'll let you know when
> > > they get here.
> > > John
> >
> > No virus found in this incoming message.
> > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> > Version: 8.5.409 / Virus Database: 270.14.4/2416 -
> > Release Date: 10/05/09 18:23:00
> >
> >
> > __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version
> > of virus signature database 4504 (20091013) __________
> >
> > The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.
> >
> > http://www.eset.com
> >
> >
> > __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version
> > of virus signature database 4504 (20091013) __________
> >
> > The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.
> >
> > http://www.eset.com
> >
> > No virus found in this incoming message.
> > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> > Version: 8.5.409 / Virus Database: 270.14.4/2416 -
> > Release Date: 10/05/09 18:23:00
> >
> >
> > __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version
> > of virus signature database 4504 (20091013) __________
> >
> > The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.
> >
> > http://www.eset.com
> >
> >
> > __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version
> > of virus signature database 4504 (20091013) __________
> >
> > The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.
> >
> > http://www.eset.com
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 8.5.409 / Virus Database: 270.14.4/2416 -
> Release Date: 10/05/09 18:23:00
Other related posts:
