Regarding the BRF files, I was explaining the rational, or thought behind
why the format was included initially as an option, not on its
implementation or use since startup. It seems that when you provide people
with options, no matter how you perceive they're uses, they will always
surprise you and use them differently. While on the subject of surprise, I
went back and checked the Bernard Cornwell books that I remembered
validating that came in as 2 formats (RTF & BRF), and found you're right,
the BRF copies are only downloadable as BRF files. Perhaps I got into some
of Guido's 'shrooms' or maybe I'm just hallucinating from some other
stimulant or depressant, but I would have sworn that the last time I
checked it out there were Daisy files available from the BRF books as well.
Dave
Hi. I think Dave might be partially wrong about his explanation of .brf files. First, I know of several cases of .brf only with no other formats. Look at the Left Behind books for kids. Second, I think it would be next to impossible to create a DAISY file from .brf because the majority of the formatting is thrown away. As far as I've seen, and at least from a validator's prospective, the software does not do any back-translating and the volunteer isn't expected to either. My understanding has been that either .brf files should be sent to an embosser or loaded into a notetaker. I don't recall where I read this, but one of the bookshare.org documents says that, in cases where both DAISY and .brf exist, the .brf was made by software from the plain text and may have translation errors. The general, unspoken policy seems to me that .brf should not be submitted because they are much more difficult to work with for validators.
Also, premit me a short rant. As most of you know, embossers and note taking devices are very expensive. When one is forced to use a .brf file only, they're being left out if they don't have one of those devices or, heaven forbid, they can't read Braille. In a perfect world, every blind person would have such a device and would be born knowing Braille, but that won't happen. In a perfect world, we wouldn't need a service like bookshare.org anyway.
Now, permit me to counteract some of the above. There are a few programs which translate or back-translate files. Most are commercial such as Duxbury, but there is at least one which is free and works reasonably well. It is NFBTrans. The main fault with it is that it still runs in either a DOS box or under Linux. Someone was working on a Windows interface but I haven't followed it in a couple of years. While NFBTrans is very good at actual Braille translation, it still makes little errors when reversing the process. It was not intended to be a back-translator but turned into one as time went by. It is an all volunteer effort so the translation tables aren't perfect. However, I've processed tons of NLS files with it and it works very well. Sorry, but I don't have links for it. You can try winnfbtrans.org or something like that but I don't think that's right.
Briefly getting back to the Left Behind kids novels, those .brf files were from a Braille transcriber and were specifically designed for an embosser. I would much rather have scanned copies in DAISY. One thing I really like about DAISY is how simple it is to convert to plain text, Braille, html, or other formats. You just don't have that flexibility with .brf.
