Hi.
We weren't completely aware of this either.
Bert: I like your suggestion to create 3 tables, although I'm not sure what to
name the middle one. They could be called for instance "Norwegian 8 dot
computer braille", "Norwegian 8 dot" and "Norwegian 8 dot with uncontracted
6-dot fallback" respectively?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jostein Austvik Jacobsen – Utvikler
NLB – Norsk lyd- og blindeskriftbibliotek
www.nlb.no
________________________________
Fra: Bert Frees [bertfrees@xxxxxxxxx]
Sendt: 4. desember 2015 10:52
Til: liblouis-liblouisxml@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Kopi: Ammar Usama; Jostein Austvik Jacobsen
Emne: Re: [liblouis-liblouisxml] Norwegian 8 dot tables
Hi Jamie,
I'm sorry, I wasn't even aware of the old table. I know the new table was
created from a JAWS table:
http://www.punktskriftutvalget.no/nyheter/ny-punkttabell-for-jaws.
I'd say keep using the old one for now.
Both tables look very similar, it seems they are derived from the same thing.
The only difference I could find is that the new table contains a lot more
definitions, so I think it might just be a newer version. Note that the old
table also contains duplicate dot patterns (see section "Added 21.02.2012" at
the bottom), so isn't strictly computer braille either. The other difference is
that the new table will fall back to 6 dot braille when a symbol is not defined.
I'm copying the creators of the new table.
What about doing the following? We create 3 tables:
- The first which is "real" computer braille defines all symbols in the range
00-FF (= no-no.ctb without "Added 21.02.2012"),
- the second includes the first and adds all the other symbols (=
no-no-8dot.utb without "include no-no-chardefs6.uti"),
- the third includes the second and in addition falls back to 6 dot
uncontracted (= no-no-8dot.utb).
2015-12-04 4:01 GMT+01:00 James Teh
<jamie@xxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:jamie@xxxxxxxxxxxx>>:
Hi all,
We now seem to have two Norwegian 8 dot tables: no-no.ctb (which NVDA currently
calls "Norwegian 8 dot computer braille") and the new no-no-8dot.utb (which the
header says is "Norwegian 8 dot"). The new table seems to include some
duplicate dot patterns, so it isn't strictly "computer braille".
Is the old table supposed to be deprecated and superseded by the new table? Or
are they both valid? If they're both valid, how should we describe them?
This seems to be an unfortunate pattern with some newer liblouis tables. A new
table gets added for some (probably very good) reason and it seems to serve a
similar purpose or have a similar purpose in an existing table, but there's no
documentation about whether the new table deprecates the old one, whether the
old table is still valid at all, how they're different, how they should be
named from a user perspective (given that both have similar names), etc. I
think it'd be useful if these issues can be clarified before a table is
accepted. UEB is another example of this: new tables were added, but we already
had existing tables, which makes for a very confusing mess. It's not currently
clear (to me let alone anyone who doesn't know the history) as to which table
should be used.
Also, any chance of including the file names for new tables in the release
notes when tables are added, as well as notes and file names for any tables
that got renamed?
Thanks!
Jamie
--
James Teh
Executive Director, NV Access Limited
Ph +61 7 3149 3306<tel:%2B61%207%203149%203306>
www.nvaccess.org<http://www.nvaccess.org>
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/NVAccess
Twitter: @NVAccess
SIP: jamie@xxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:jamie@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
For a description of the software, to download it and links to
project pages go to http://liblouis.org
