[bksvol-discuss] Re: braille contractions
- From: "Sharon Jackson" <dolly1025@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2004 19:31:25 -0400
Jana,
It could be a braille display thing or formatting because my Braille Note is
intermittent when it spells the word out or when it uses the contraction.
Sharon
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jana Jackson" <jana@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, July 06, 2004 7:19 PM
Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: braille contractions
> Hi, Sarah and others! I totally agree. Sighted folks would never put up
> with having some committee decide which symbols were appropriate for the
> print alphabet. <smile> Anyway, to answer Liz's question, if this code is
> adopted, the words to and by will be spelled out, and the contractions
will
> be eliminated. I've noticed that they already are spelled out on my
Braille
> display, and I assume this is a Jaws thing. <Smile>
>
> Jana
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Sarah Van Oosterwijck" <curiousentity@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Tuesday, July 06, 2004 3:34 PM
> Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: braille contractions
>
>
> > What a big waist of valuable shelving real-estate, not to mention
waisted
> > time in dragging our fingers over more area than necessary to read those
> > words. It's a big enough problem for braille readers that whole phrases
> > can't be read at once as suggested to increase reading speed for the
> > sighted. Now they want to occupy our fingers with trivial words instead
> of
> > the big ones that it takes several finger tips to span.
> > But that's just my opinion.
> >
> > Sarah Van Oosterwijck
> > curious entity at earthlink dot net
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Sharon Jackson" <dolly1025@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Sent: Tuesday, July 06, 2004 12:20 PM
> > Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: braille contractions
> >
> >
> > > I completed my braille course for my graduate classes last year and
> there
> > > was no mention of any such changes. I know the unified Braille Code
was
> > > passed, but whether or not BANA has adopted it, I'm not sure.
> > >
> > > Sharon
> > >
> > >
> > > >From: Jill O'Connell <jillocon@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > >Reply-To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > >To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > >Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: braille contractions
> > > >Date: Tue, 06 Jul 2004 10:08:29 -0700
> > > >
> > > >I had not heard that "to" and "by" were now being separated and hope
it
> > > >isn't true. In the book I am validating, most of the time these words
> are
> > > >contracted and adjoin the following word. The reason I asked the
> question
> > > >is that I have no idea how I could correct this. Does this have to do
> > with
> > > >the Duxbury translation, and if so, I wonder why it isn't always
done.
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: Jackie M.
> > > > To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > Sent: Monday, July 05, 2004 10:53 PM
> > > > Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: braille contractions
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > The new braille code separates "by" from all other words, also
"to"
> is
> > > >separated. Since they are also separated in print, I don't think you
> > > >should correct that. On my braille display, which is translating
print
> > > >text into grade two contracted braille, "to" and "by" are always
> > separated
> > > >from the following word. Did I understand your question right?
> > > >
> > > > - Jackie McCraw
> > > >
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: Jill O'Connell
> > > > To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > Sent: Monday, July 05, 2004 10:39 PM
> > > > Subject: [bksvol-discuss] braille contractions
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I am validating a book in text format on the BrailleNote but
> reading
> > > >in grade 2. What should I do when I see such words as "by" or "to"
not
> > > >attached to the following word? If I can't do anything to correct
that
> > now,
> > > >won't it also show up in the final version (something I have seen
quite
> > > >often). Suggestions anyone?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
>
Other related posts:
