[bksvol-discuss] Re: New proofreaders

  • From: Scott Rains <scottr@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: "bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2011 09:37:53 -0700

Pam,

Here's a bit of looking under the hood to distinguish between two ways of 
representing image descriptions in digital books.

So far are image descriptions are what we might call "in line descriptions." 
That is what is described in the Volunteer Manual.

What Benetech is developing through the DIAGRAM Center is a way of coding the 
image descriptions like you would any HTML element. Specifically, image 
descriptions are embedded in the "prod notes" element by the image description 
insertion application we are creating and testing. Using this approach the 
descriptions can remain hidden if the reader prefers.

Scott
________________________________________
From: bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] 
On Behalf Of Pamela Hoffard [crosssttch@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2011 5:08 PM
To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: New proofreaders

Scott,

I want you to know that I agree with Valerie.  If a struggling sighted reader 
is using Bookshare's services for easy clear reading, the picture descriptions 
would "get in the way" for reading the text.  The actual text of the book would 
be almost readable to the child, but the level of words in the picture 
descriptions would just be frustrating to read for a struggling reader.

Just my opinion,

Pam

________________________________
From: Valerie Maples <vlmaples@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Mon, July 25, 2011 6:16:21 PM
Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: New proofreaders

Hi, Scott!

In talking to multiple people invested in emergent literacy, then, we need to 
find a way to consider either not adding picture descriptions on beginning 
readers with images instead and a different version for blind kids and parents. 
 Otherwise, the books can actually be harmful to assisting kids in developing  
literacy.  I am probably not distilling the message properly, but different 
reading levels, cognitives levels have different needs and a one size fits all 
will actually discourage beginning readers from developing literacy.

I am not saying change everything old, but rather, can we consider a shift to a 
more appropriate level for children on newly added books?  Considering so much 
funding has come from the DOE, I think literacy for kids, not just literature 
access should eventually be considered as we realize the impact and opportunity 
we have.

Thank you for your patience with me as I try to help kids learn to love to read 
without barriers.

Valerie


On Jul 25, 2011, at 3:57 PM, Scott Rains wrote:

Hi Valerie,

I got an answer back already This is not a change we can support given the 
legacy of DAISY books in the collection. Sorry.

Scott Rains

From: Valerie Maples <vlmaples@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:vlmaples@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
Reply-To: "bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>" 
<bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2011 19:36:56 -0700
To: "bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>" 
<bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: New proofreaders

Hi, Scott!

Ask them to seriously consider it as an option, if not a standard.  It is a 
huge deal for starting sighted readers that Nichole is very eagerly advocating 
for.

Thanks!

Valerie


On Jul 20, 2011, at 7:35 PM, Scott Rains wrote:

Valerie,

Interesting approach. Let me talk it through with Collection Development and 
Engineering. A change like that would require a lot of cross-domain 
conversation. But, for now, the answer is "no."

Scott

From: Valerie Maples <vlmaples@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:vlmaples@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
Reply-To: "bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>" 
<bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2011 17:29:43 -0700
To: "bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>" 
<bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: New proofreaders

Hey, Scott!

Reading with Nichole and trying to work with Nichole's teacher about 
introducing Bookshare to beginning readers, I have a question/proposition.  In 
order to place emphasis on readable text in board books and early reader 
picture books, books that have no other navigation than title, would it be 
acceptable to put book text in bold 16 or 18 pt. and picture descriptions, not 
bolded and in 12 pt?  It would help print "pop" for visual readers (dyspexic 
and kids with PD) and even allow teaching navigation in a more useful and 
functional ways to early readers.  That way a parent reading the book would 
have easy access to all information, but a new reader being introduced to 
reading would have better presentation of age level text.

Thoughts?

Valerie


On Jul 20, 2011, at 3:43 PM, Scott Rains wrote:

 4)  Use these font sizes:          For the:
                          20 point  +  BOLDING        Book title
                          18 point  +  BOLDING        Larger section headings  
(such as "Part I", or "Section 2")
                          16 point  +  BOLDING        Headings for each section 
in the Front Matter, & Back Matter
                          16 point  +  BOLDING        Chapter headings
                          14 point  +  BOLDING        Chapter subheadings
                          12 point                             Text in the body 
of the book
                     5)  Maximum font size for anything in the file:       =  
20 point
                          Minimum font size for anything in the file:        =  
 8 point
Scott



N?§²æìr¸?yúè?Øb²X¬¶Ç§u¦åjy?¨¥¶?ä²ú%v+ºË+z«?²×ëyéb²Û(®
n¶Ø^Â?ݺ{.nÇ+?·?Ê+lzWâ?Ø^²æãyËe?w?¢­jX¬¶?Ú½¨¥i¹^r?¦jwl¦ëm?ì(­Ø^??ò?Û?ø§¶¬¹¸ÞrÙb?

Other related posts: