[brailleblaster] Re: Block diagram with clarifications

  • From: Michael Whapples <mwhapples@xxxxxxx>
  • To: brailleblaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2012 20:03:02 +0100

This is just puzzling me further. I think there must be some fundamental parts of BrailleBlaster which are not properly defined. While documentation can seem burdensome, it sometimes is necessary to ensure people are talking about the same things. May be BrailleBlaster needs more documentation and may be a glossary for what certain terms mean. In this spirit, I have quoted certain phrases in the following message and given definitions for what I understand these terms to mean (see end of my message for my glossary).


First thing is, may be semantic action files are doing too much, in this I mean both liblouisutdml and BrailleBlaster semantic action files. When one looks at BrailleBlaster and liblouisutdml there are certain things which are common to both (eg. loading a document into a "document model" from the "original source"). In trying to minimise duplication then these common actions should be made common. While the ideal case might be the code and the rules for how to do this would be shared, it may not be possible to have common code, but if the rules are defined in external files then these should be reusable. I would argue that the code could even be common, while liblouisutdml may not want to become specific to BrailleBlaster, BrailleBlaster is certainly highly linked to liblouisutdml, so why couldn't that offer a function to applications for loading a "document model". Obviously this would need the Java bindings for liblouisutdml to know how to convert the C "document model" into a Java "document model" and probably back.

So what I am saying is, may be semantic action files need to be changed as to what they work on, rather than working on "original source" they should work on a "document model". Then the files defining the rules for mapping from "original source" to "document model" could be common and so no duplication there.

Now to the fundamentals which aren't making sense to me. Well I will only mention one, as its relevant and I don't want to spend too much time writing this email.

What is the "print view"? What is the "print view" for? How does the "print view" add to BrailleBlaster goals? What is the "print view" not? My answers to these say that the suggested configuration files contain stuff they should not need to contain, hence why I am asking these questions in case the definition has moved on.

Here are some answers from my understanding:
1. The print view is a representation of the document using "print text characters". The print view will allow the user to easily see the structure of the document according to the actual structural definition. 2. The print view will be used by the user to identify where the "original source" did not give specific structural information and so will allow the user to correct this so that when the document is translated the Braille will contain the correct layout. An example of where a document might not contain correct structural information is where the author specified fonts and other text attributes for a heading rather than using the correct mark up for a heading. 3. By allowing the user to identify where the document does not contain sufficient structural information to allow a good quality Braille translation, it will assist the user in ensuring that the document has correct structural information and so hopefully lead to better quality Braille documents being produced. 4. The "print view" is not designed for "pretty print documents". If a user desires a pretty print document to read there document in print form then they may be advised to find alternative software designed for that purpose. Equally the "print view" would not be for creating perfectly formatted hard copy pretty print documents, again other software may be better designed for that task. To implement any of this answer in BrailleBlaster's print view would not contribute to the goals of BrailleBlaster as I understand them, hence why they are what the print view is not.

Taking my answers, particularly to the question of what the "print view" is not, I have questions over why BrailleBlaster configuration files need page information. Why would someone be printing the "print view", if the view is purely on screen then why does it need splitting into pages? The only case I can see for when a page break needs to be seen in the "print view" is when the document contains an explicit page break. On screen need not have paper size, margins, etc, these are all just unnecessary.

Again, may be configuration files are covering too much, may be they need to focus on specific parts of the process. As an example, when would it ever be needed that BrailleBlaster would need internet access to load the document but liblouisutdml would not? Surely this information could be shared? In fact, is there anything in the xml section of a liblouisutdml configuration file which would not be relevant to BrailleBlaster? So in seeking maximum reuse, why cannot BrailleBlaster use a liblouisutdml configuration file? May be correct uses of sections in the configuration files would be needed, eg. a [BrailleBlaster] section which liblouisutdml will happily ignore. These configuration files could be provided by the BrailleBlaster project if you don't want liblouisutdml to ship with this extra stuff, also correct uses of include statements could help here in keeping the separation you want. Also the liblouisutdml specific stuff is actually relevant to BrailleBlaster here, BrailleBlaster will need to provide a user friendly way of configuring liblouisutdml, so why not have it that BrailleBlaster works on one file?

Glossary:
Document model: An abstract representation of a document. It should be a common model regardless of where the document came from or what the "original source" format is. There may be different implementations of a document model for different programming languages, but it might be conceivable that there may be ways of passing thenm between programming languages if such interoperability was desired. Original source: This is the format of a particular document, examples might be epub, docbook, daisy, XHTML, and so on. Pretty print documents: This is a print document as one would desire if producing it for a sighted audience, IE. how a publisher would intend to make a book look, making an article presentable for publishing, etc. Print view: The visual view of the document in BrailleBlaster, where the text will use print text characters and the view will allow identification of the document's structure. The print view will allow editing of the document, this is mainly to allow the user to correct minor text issues (eg. spelling mistakes) and correct formatting (eg. if the original source presented a heading by increasing the font, etc rather than specifying the correct structural element for a heading). Print text characters: These are the print characters of the alphabet. Most commonly the characters within the latin character set, but could also be Chinese characters, etc.

Michael Whapples
On 13/10/2012 17:03, John J. Boyer wrote:
well, there is a lot of misunderstanding. I misunderstood your
presentation in your first message, thinkikng it was not
well-thought-out. Here is more explanation.

BrailleBlaster semanntic-action files are used to construch a document
model. This model is then used for displaying and editing both the print
and Braille views.

Braille rules vary wildly from one country to another. It is less
confusing to have a fairly standard print display of the document. The
user can always see how a block of characters is rendered in Braille by
focusing on the Braille window. This will show the part of the print
text corresponding to each line of the Braille in the print window.

There is a great deal in liblouisutdml semantic-action files that is
meaningless to BrailleBlaster. Similarly, the structure of
semantic-action files that is best for BrailleBlaster would not work in
liblouisutdml. Trying to combine the two to keep down the number of
files would lead to a great deal of confusion. There is already a lot of
confusion between what pertains to print and what pertains to Braille.

liblouisutdml and BrailleBlaster development should remain separate,
because liblouisutdml and liblouis are intended to form a transcription
engine that can be used in almost any application. Of course,
liblouisutdml can be enhanced with functionality that we discover is
needed while developing BrailleBlaster. An example would be a function
to report how much of a transcription is finished as a percentage, so
that it can be used in a progress bar.

John

On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 04:11:31PM +0100, Michael Whapples wrote:
I did put thought into the reply, to say it wasn't well thought out to
me feels insulting.

Whether I understood everything fully may be a question, if there are
misunderstandings then we would do better in trying to explain it better.

I am still unclear to really what the difference of semantic action
files for BrailleBlaster and liblouisutdml are. Yes print is not Braille
and vice versa, but both are generated from documents. So map from the
document model to the view, why have the view go right back to the
original XML?

Documents may come from many sources, so why not map from the file
format to the document model? This surely would reduce duplication of
how to process a particular flavour of XML as there would only be one
definition of how to process it.

With what I have suggested, there would be files to map from file
formats into the document model and files to map from the document model
to the user's representation of the document (print or Braille). With
what I am suggesting, add a new supported document format, you only need
to add one file to map from the format to the document model, rather
than one for each user's representation (at current that would be two
files). Want to add another user's representation, my idea would mean
add one mapping, under what has been proposed I understand it to require
as many files as formats supported.

May be the current design of BraileBlaster and liblouisutdml where they
are fairly separated would not allow exactly what I suggest, but still
why do they need separate files to use? Isn't there a way to allow them
to share semantic action files? This would at least reduce the work in
supporting various formats. There may be features of the files not used
by both (eg. the files may specify editing information which
liblouisutdml does not need), but any uneedede information could be
ignored by that tool (liblouisutdml could ignore editing information).

Further to the above, I also reject the idea that BrailleBlaster's GUI
is producing print documents. This is quite a subtle point, the
rejection is that we are not producing software which sighted people
would choose to use to print documents because the visual output is so
pretty, rather the visual aspect is more to show the document structure
so that a sighted person will understand how the document will be
translated (IE. a heading need not look like a print heading as in a
print book, they just need a way that they can easily distinguish there
is a heading which will appear in Braille). My point here is that the
visual display needs to represent what should happen in the translation
process, so may be the two are fairly linked in what they need to show,
IE. they are just different ways of showing the same information.

I guess a better phrase to describe what I mean, BrailleBlaster's GUI
shows a print representation of BrailleBlaster's document, liblouisutdml
will produce a Braille representation of that document. Ideally the
Braille representation needs to conform to official Braille rules (I
mean more than just the translation, I mean follow the standard for
formatting), so may be the BrailleBlaster document model will be swayed
towards Braille rules.

Notes on what I have used, to show this was thought out:
* BrailleBlaster semantic action files are tied to the underlying
document format: Appendix B says "the key part of a line in a
semantic-action file is a reference to markup in the document. This may
be literal markup or an XPath expression".
* Section 4 of the liblouisutdml documentation has the title "Connecting
with the XML document - Semantic action files", this sounds very much
like it goes right back to the underlying XML as well, also supported by
mentions of using xpath expressions to identify nodes, etc.
* My statement of documents should go to a intermediate document model,
so that the various views need not be concerned with the underlying
document format, this is a key part of object orientation. If the
document model were represented by a interface, then the view only needs
to know that what it has been handed implements that interface, it need
not know how it works or even what class type it is. This is why
frameworks which use dependency injection, such as the spring framework,
can be extended so easily, although it must be noted that I am not
suggesting we go as far as using dependency injection or spring framework.
* My thought on BrailleBlaster's GUI and the Braille being just
different representations of the same information, a similar example
might be having data in a table and the same data plotted on a graph, it
may look very different but it contains exactly the same information. It
must be noted that even for some data there may be a number of different
choices of what sort of graph could be used (eg. peoples' responses to a
multiple choice question, it could be shown on a bar chart, it possibly
could be shown in a PI chart).
* Further to that last point, the data may be held in many ways, it
might be in an excel spreadsheet, it might be in a database, it might be
in a CSV file, may be in XML, etc. It just seems crazy duplication to
map straight from the input to the output rather than going to an
intermediate model (eg. for responses to a multiple choice question I
have identified three outputs and I have named 4 input formats, direct
mapping requires 12 mappings, mapping to an intermediate model would
only require 7 in total, 4 mappings for input and 3 mappings for
outputs. It gets worse as you add more inputs/outputs, add another
output you will need 16 direct mappings, but only 8 if going through a
common model, increase outputs to 5 and you need 20 direct mappings but
only 9 if going through the model, and so on).
* How many inputs and outputs do we wish to support in BrailleBlaster?
There are certainly a large number of inputs, there are many file
formats out there and as I mentioned it is possible to think that other
outputs could be conceived (eg. conversion to speech document). I
certainly do not wish to support such a level of duplication as my
calculations seem to suggest may need supporting in BrailleBlaster.

Michael Whapples
On 13/10/2012 02:36, John J. Boyer wrote:
The configuration files are analogous to MSWord templates. The
semantic-action files enable BrailleBlaster to work with any flavor of
xml. The different flavors all use different markup. BrailleBlaster uses
a different set of configuration and semantic-action files than
liblouisutdml because print is not Braille and BrailleBlaster also does
editing. The algorithms in liblouisutdml have been successful, so it is
worthwhile to consider adapting them for wider application.

The reply does not seem to be well-thought out.

John

On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 08:42:58PM +0100, Michael Whapples wrote:
I guess the main thing which crosses my mind is that there seems to be
quite a bit of duplication between BrailleBlaster and liblouisutdml,
particularly configuration files and semantic action files.

If focusing on configuration files and semantic action files, I just
don't get the difference of those for BrailleBlaster and liblouisutdml.
OK, its said that the BrailleBlaster ones are for how BrailleBlaster
displays documents and the liblouisutdml ones are for how Braille is
produced, but what is the difference, surely the idea of the GUI of
BrailleBlaster is so that people can see the structure of the document
and how that might be handled for being put into Braille? Why does
processing for the specific output have to always go right back to the
underlying document format?

Let me give some examples: Documents normally contain certain common
features, headings, paragraphs, lists, emphasised text, etc. All the GUI
is interested in is whether it has a heading, a list, a paragraph, etc,
it should not be interested in how XHTML, docbook, epub, etc store these
elements. Equally, there are two outputs (at current) which the user may
encounter, the BrailleBlaster GUI and Braille/tactile document.

Requiring a mapping from file format to output system leads to a large
number of files required. In this case where there are two views
(BrailleBlaster's GUI and Braille from liblouisutdml) we need twice as
many as supported document formats. If additional document views were
added (eg. may be someone wanted to add a way to produce a spoken
version using TTS, not suggesting it as an actual feature at this point)
then another whole set of files for all supported formats would need
producing.

I guess I am thinking down the MVC design pattern, the document is the
model and implements a common model regardless of where it came from,
the views being BrailleBlaster's GUI and the Braille document (at the
moment) and the controller being there simply to introduce the two
together. If a new document format was supported then neither view needs
any modification, if a new view were added then none of the support
formats would be affected. Sounds much more maintainable.

Additionally with what was originally suggested, I get the feeling that
BrailleBlaster's GUI could show document elements differently depending
on what file format is being viewed (IE. a heading may look different if
viewing a epub rather than docbook). OK, one might work to try and not
let this happen, but the potential is there from what I understand.

Just my views.

Michael Whapples
On 12/10/2012 18:39, John J. Boyer wrote:
Here is the block diagram with some clarifications. I would appreciate
comments. It is important to be quite sure that this is the best
approach for BrailleBlaster.

--------------------

This is a sort of informal block diagram in narrative form. It is
intended as a guide for the future development of BrailleBlaster.

Input may be in the form of an xml file or it may be a utd working file
which has been saved so that work can be resumed later. xml files may be
original well-formed files of any flavor, for example, dtbook, docbook,
etc. They may also be derived from other formats such as MSWord, rtf,
and so on. Another source is file sets, such as NIMAS or epub. In this
case the manifest is opened, and the file to be processed is chosen from
it. A means is provided to concatenate several files into one. xml files
can also be derived from plain-text by calling the translateTextFile
method with formatFor utd or from brf files by calling backTrnslateFile,
also with formatFor utd.

Whatever its source, an xml file is rendered by calling translateFile
with formatFor utd. BrailleBlaster then works on the utd file produced.
In the case of formerly saved utd files or those produced by importing
plain text or brf files, BrailleBlaster works with these directly.

The file is first parsed to produce a parse tree.

The configuration files indicated in the user's settings are then read
and used to begin the construction of a semantic table. This table is
used to specify how markup in the document is to be rendered on the
screen and how styles and actions are to be associated with markup for
editing. For more on configuration files see Appendix A.

Semantic-action files are then read. A file is chosen by looking for a
file with the name of the root element and the extension .sem or
according to an indication in the configuration files. The information
in the semantic-action files is used to complete the semantic table. For
more on semantic-action files see Appendix B.

If the semantic-action files contain XPath expressions as keys these are
applied to the parse tree, and the selected nodes are modified by adding
an attribute indicating the entry in the semantic table to be used. The
value of each key will already have been entered into this table.

The keys containing markup in the semantic files are then applied to the
parse tree, and a similar attribute is added to the matching nodes,
unnless it is already present because it has been added by an XPath
expression.

This forms the DOM of the document.

This DOM is then used to display the document on the screen. Both the
print and Braille windows are filled in this process.

Editing of the print document can then take place. If the contents of a
text node are altered the new contents replace the old. They are also
dynamically translated and the translation is shown in the Braille
window. If an element node is deleted its entire subtree is deleted. If
a new block of characters is created the user is prompted to asign it a
style and a node with the appropriate markup (derived from the
semantic-action files) is added to the document at the place where the
new block was created.

if focus is shifted to the Braille window and the user has checked the
Edit Braille box on the advanced menu the window can be edited. Any
editing is highlighted in both the Braille and print windows. The print
window also changes to show the part of the original text that
corresponds to each line of Braille.

Dince the user may wish to view the result of editing Braille in the
context of the entire document, The translate and back-translate items
on the menu are replaced with retranslate and reback-translate.

The file can be saved as a utd file so work can be resumed later or it
can be saved as the original xml file with enhancements. These consist
of edited Braille which has been moved into the print document with
proper markup (specified in the semantic-actionn files). The attributes
used to create the DOM are removed during the save process. Editing in
the print window is handled automatically as part of the conversion of
the parse tree to a file.

Besides saving the file as utd or as an envanced document, it can be
saved as a brf file or embossed.

The enhanced document can then later be rendered by liblouisutdml with
any liblouisutdml configuration and semantic-action files that the user
wishes. This can be done either by BrailleBlaster or by another
application which uses the loblouis-liblouisutdml transcription engine.

Appendix A: Configuration Files

Here is a description of BrailleBlaster configuration files. They
specify how BrailleBlaster shall operate. The one which the user has
selected is referenced in the userSettings.properties file. Selection,
creation and editing are done via a dialogue. Note that BrailleBlaster
configuration files are completely separate from liblouisutdml
configuration files. They are stored in the configurations directory
within the programData directory. Below is a sample file. More lines
will be added as development proceeds. Explanations follow the sample.

--------------------

hyphenate=no
pageNumberAt=top
topMargin=0.5
leftMargin=1
rightMargin=0.5
bottomMargin=0.5
paperHeight=11
paperWidth=8.5
xmlheader="<?xml=version='1.0'=encoding='UTF-8'=standalone='yes'?>
semanticFiles=*
internetAccessRequired=no
newEntries=yes
file:filename include
debug=no
styles=para,heading1,heading2,list

--------------------

The first line specifies whether hyphenation should be used when a
document is displayed onscreen.

The second line specifies where the page number should be placed.

Then come six lines specifying margins and paper size. These are used
principally for making hard copies.

the xmlheader line specifies the header that should be used at the
beginning of new files.

semanticFiles is a comma-separated list of the semantic files to be
used. Here the value is an asterisk, which means to use the file which
is named for the root element of the document. This is actually the
default, so this line is not strictly necessary.

InternetAccessRequired specifies whether the Internet will be needed for
processing a document, e.g., for getting a DTD.

newEntries specifies whether a record should be kept of the markup in a
document which has not been assigned to a semantic action or style. This
is useful when processing a new flavor of xml for which a
semantic-action file does not exist. It applies to all documents.
Semantic-action files can also have a newEntries line. It applies to
that type of document only.

The include line, with a preceding filename, specifies that another
configuration file is to be read at the point where it is encountered.

debug specifies whether extra testing should be done, experimental
features used, and extra logging done.

The styles line gives a comma-separated list of styles that will be used
in displaying and editing a document. These styles are in the styles
directory.

The order of entries in a configuration file is generally not important.
However, an include line does cause the referenced file to be read at
the point where it is encountered.

Appendix B: Semantic-Action Files

Semantic-action files associate the markup in a particular type of xml
document with BrailleBlaster styles, methods (actions) and macros.
Usually they are named by concatenating the name of the root element of
the document flavor with the extension .sem They are not to be confused
with liblouisutdml semantic-action files. The latter are concerned with
rendering an xml document into Braille and tactile graphics.
BrailleBlaster semantic-action files are concerned with displaying the
contents of a document on the screen and with editing them. They are
stored in the semantics directory in the programData directory. There is
a dialogue for creating and editing them.

the key part of a line in a semantic-action file is a reference to
markup in the document. This may be literal markup or an XPath
expression. There are a few exceptions, which will be discussed later.
The value part contains the name of a style or action, or of a macro,
which can combine several styles and actions. it may also contain
parameters.

Literal keys may have one of the following forms: an element name; an
element name, a comma, and an attribute name; an element name, a comma,
an attribute name, an attribute value. XPath keys begin with the
characters &xpath with the XPath expression imediately following and
enclosed in parentheses. The key may also be the word newEntries. If the
value is yes markup which has not yet been associated with anything is
recorded and placed in a prototype semantic-action file. The key may
also be the word file, followed by a colon followed by a filename. In
this case the value is the word include, and the line specifies that
another semantic file should be read at this point.

Values start with one of the words action macro style. This is followed
by a space. If action is specified, the action is one of those below. If
style is specified a style name follows. The extension .properties is
added to it and it is looked up in the styles directory. Likewise,
macros are looked up in the macro directory. All three may have
parameters preceded by a space and separated by comas.

The following actions may be specified.

   no, Do nothing except insert a space.
   skip, Skip the subtree of which this markup is the root.
   generic, Apply the parameters.
   cdata, Special processing for CData sections.
   htmllink, Insert a link
   htmltarget, to this target.
   configfile, Specify a configuration file.
   configstring, Specify a configuration string.
   configtweak, Use new configurations while rendering.
   # reserved styles. These styles are predefined, but may be altered
   document, Assign to the node that actually contains the content, such
        as the book node in dtbook.
   para, A paragraph.
   heading1,various levels of headings
   heading2,
   heading3,
   heading4,
   heading5,
   heading6,
   heading7,
   heading8,
   heading9,
   heading10,
   contentsheader, The heading of the table of contents.
   contents1, Various levels within the contents.
   contents2,
   contents3,
   contents4,
   contents5,
   contents6,
   contents7,
   contents8,
   contents9,
   contents10,
   # General text
   attrtotext, Transform an attribute value to text.
   runninghead, Specify a running header.
   footer, Specify a page footer.
   boxline, Specify a line of identical characters.
   italicx, Italicise the text within the markup.
   boldx, Bold it.
   underlinex, Underline it.
   linespacing, Number of blank lines between lines of characters.
   blankline, Leave a blank  line.
   softreturn, Start a new line, but not a new style.
   newpage, Start a new page.
   brl, Process the <brl> subtree rooted at this node.
   music, Display/edit the music notation in this subtree.
   math, Display/edit the MathML notation in this subtree.
   chemistry, Display/edit the chemistry notation in this subtree.
   graphic, Display/edit the graphic pointed to by the markup.





Other related posts: