[liblouis-liblouisxml] Re: Display opcode versus normal character opcodes
- From: "John J. Boyer" <john.boyer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: liblouis-liblouisxml@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2012 15:04:51 -0500
Hi Vic,
This looks good. Never underestimate the weirdness of Braille codes.
Dots 56 isn't a letter sign in non-English codes. You'll find out if it
is correct if you get complaints from customers.
John
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 03:31:14PM -0400, Vic Beckley wrote:
> Thanks John. I got it to work. It was defined as semicolon in the dis file.
> I used the following opcodes in the main table:
>
> punctuation ; 56
> postpunc ; 23
> begcaps 56
>
> That accomplished what it looks like he was trying to accomplish. I don't
> think you want a letter sign to mark the beginning of capitalization,
> though. Do these commands look correct?
>
>
> Best regards from Ohio, U.S.A.,
>
> Vic
> E-mail: vic.beckley3@xxxxxxxxx
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: liblouis-liblouisxml-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:liblouis-liblouisxml-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of John J.
> Boyer
> Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2012 9:13 AM
> To: liblouis-liblouisxml@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [liblouis-liblouisxml] Re: Display opcode versus normal character
> opcodes
>
> Maybe the text_nabcc.dis file shoouldn't be included. It looks like the
> table was simply revised to fix a few errors. Years ago one of the
> programmers at ViewPlus that that a .dis file always had to be included.
> The tables he worked on are still a mess. However you could see what
> character is defined with dots 56 in the .dis file and then define it
> with the sign opcode in the table.
>
> Can you get the source code that ViewPlus is using for liblouis1.7? It
> should include some documentation.
>
> John
>
> On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 08:47:23AM -0400, Vic Beckley wrote:
> > John,
> >
> > I am looking at the latest version of the Czech table. What is the purpose
> > of including the *.uti files if those characters are already defined in
> the
> > text_nabcc.dis file which is included? These included definitions will
> just
> > be superseded by the ones in the text_nabcc.dis file, right?
> >
> >
> >
> > Best regards from Ohio, U.S.A.,
> >
> > Vic
> > E-mail: vic.beckley3@xxxxxxxxx
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: liblouis-liblouisxml-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > [mailto:liblouis-liblouisxml-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of John J.
> > Boyer
> > Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2012 8:38 AM
> > To: liblouis-liblouisxml@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: [liblouis-liblouisxml] Re: Display opcode versus normal character
> > opcodes
> >
> > Hi Vic,
> >
> > I know you have to work with some old tables. They are often not well
> > written. However, to get to the main point, the character-definition
> > opcodes should be used to define the dot patterns that are prevalent in
> > your country. If they are used correctly display opcodes are not needed.
> > However, suppose that you are using an embosser built in another country
> > that uses a different mappikng between characters and dot patterns. Then
> > you need the display opcode to specify this mapping. .dis files must be
> > included at the beginning of a table or must be the first file in a
> > table list. The dot patterns which are defined in such a file take
> > precedence over those defined in character-definition opcodes such as
> > uplow, digit, space, sign, etc. .dis files do not specify any
> > translations, just which dots go with which characters.O
> >
> >
> > Incidentally, it is advisable to use uplow in its full form for defining
> > characters that have both an upper and a lowercase form. For example:
> >
> > uplow Aa 17,1
> >
> > John
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 07:41:41AM -0400, Vic Beckley wrote:
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > I am confused about the purpose of the display opcode. Here are my
> > > questions:
> > >
> > > What is the purpose of the display opcode as opposed to using the uplow
> or
> > > other similar character definition opcodes?
> > >
> > > Why would a table include text_nabcc.dis which defines all the character
> > > codes and then include latinLettDef6Dots.uti and digits6Dots.uti which
> > > includes the same characters? Which would take precedence if they were
> > > defined differently?
> > >
> > > If a table included text_nabcc.dis and then proceeded to define the
> letter
> > > W, for example, in the table, which definition would be used? Would it
> > cause
> > > an error if they were different?
> > >
> > > Thanks for any help.
> > >
> > >
> > > Best regards from Ohio, U.S.A.,
> > >
> > > Vic
> > > E-mail: vic.beckley3@xxxxxxxxx
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > For a description of the software, to download it and links to
> > > project pages go to http://www.abilitiessoft.com
> >
> > --
> > John J. Boyer; President, Chief Software Developer
> > Abilitiessoft, Inc.
> > http://www.abilitiessoft.com
> > Madison, Wisconsin USA
> > Developing software for people with disabilities
> >
> > For a description of the software, to download it and links to
> > project pages go to http://www.abilitiessoft.com
> >
> > For a description of the software, to download it and links to
> > project pages go to http://www.abilitiessoft.com
>
> --
> John J. Boyer; President, Chief Software Developer
> Abilitiessoft, Inc.
> http://www.abilitiessoft.com
> Madison, Wisconsin USA
> Developing software for people with disabilities
>
> For a description of the software, to download it and links to
> project pages go to http://www.abilitiessoft.com
>
> For a description of the software, to download it and links to
> project pages go to http://www.abilitiessoft.com
--
John J. Boyer; President, Chief Software Developer
Abilitiessoft, Inc.
http://www.abilitiessoft.com
Madison, Wisconsin USA
Developing software for people with disabilities
For a description of the software, to download it and links to
project pages go to http://www.abilitiessoft.com
Other related posts:
