[brailleblaster] Re: LiblouisUTDML and backtranslate string
- From: Larry Skutchan <lskutchan@xxxxxxx>
- To: "brailleblaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <brailleblaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2014 13:34:47 +0000
You make some great points. It is one of those things that a blind user
naturally wants to do, but perhaps a reading system app would be more
appropriate for that. It seems like opening a BRF has about as much value as
opening a plain text file. Braille Blaster is designed to work with structured
content, and neither of those provides much in that area. There are plenty of
other tools out there to convert simple files to include a bit more structure,
so I agree we should be focusing resources on meeting the unique requirements
of this project.
Can you elaborate on the following:
What about bringing liblouisutdml semantic action files into a state to match
the format specification rather than document instances (
-----Original Message-----
From: brailleblaster-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:brailleblaster-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Michael Whapples
Sent: Friday, January 24, 2014 3:37 PM
To: brailleblaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [brailleblaster] Re: LiblouisUTDML and backtranslate string
My view is that opening brf is low priority and probably a distraction from
more important features at the moment.
My understanding of what BrailleBlaster is, if summing it up in one
sentence: A compelling tool for creating Braille/tactile versions of documents.
As brf is already Braille there is not such a need to import one if the output
is going to be Braille.
If including open brf is to get an epub/nimas/other ebook format then how does
it contribute to the main goal? It might be worth while work but is it really
work for another project? Is inclusion in BrailleBlaster really just the icing
on the cake?
Also considering the difficulties of back translation, which Susan described
well, is this really time well spent at the moment?
What may be more important: Is there a math/chemical formula/music/etc editor,
would it be more valuable to support all parts of a document?
Are there other computer formats (eg. word document, PDF, ODT, etc) which we
want to support? What about bringing liblouisutdml semantic action files into a
state to match the format specification rather than document instances (this
comment has been made by others a few times in the past). Also what about
locked Braille? Better documentation.
Michael Whapples
On 24/01/2014 19:00, Keith Creasy wrote:
> Michael.
>
> I'm listening. Are you saying that you don't see a need for a user to open a
> BRF into BrailleBlaster to work on it? If everyone elase agrees then maybe we
> don't need to do it. That does happen at APH but I suppose our transcribers
> could just use their existing tools for that. If others don't see it as
> important then I'm fine with dropping it.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: brailleblaster-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:brailleblaster-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Michael
> Whapples
> Sent: Friday, January 24, 2014 1:56 PM
> To: brailleblaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [brailleblaster] Re: LiblouisUTDML and backtranslate string
>
> May be my question should have been: Is this a scenario which BrailleBlaster
> is meant to support?
>
> I infer from your answer that this might be a yes although I am not sure
> really why it should be.
>
> Michael Whapples
> On 24/01/2014 18:44, Keith Creasy wrote:
>> I don't think so but it will be soon.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: brailleblaster-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> [mailto:brailleblaster-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Michael
>> Whapples
>> Sent: Friday, January 24, 2014 8:36 AM
>> To: brailleblaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Subject: [brailleblaster] Re: LiblouisUTDML and backtranslate string
>>
>> Is this a scenario supported by BrailleBlaster?
>>
>> Michael Whapples
>> On 24/01/2014 13:25, John J. Boyer wrote:
>>> Back-translation would also be used if the user wanted to open a brf
>>> file.
>>>
>>> John
>>> On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 06:25:31AM -0500, Keith Creasy wrote:
>>>> Hi all
>>>>
>>>> Back-translation only applies to BrailleBlaster in reference to six-key
>>>> Braille input and the desire to have both a text and Braille view.If that
>>>> is for some reason not the case then I guess we need to decide that.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks.
>>>> Keith
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Sent from my iPad
>>>>
>>>>> On Jan 24, 2014, at 5:23 AM, Larry Skutchan <lskutchan@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Perhaps APH expanded the project's scope by targeting the development of
>>>>> a tool that transcribers could use to produce effective, accurate braille
>>>>> from EPUB or NIMAS files. Some of the techniques planned could use
>>>>> accurate back translation.
>>>>> How serious are the back translation problems?
>>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: brailleblaster-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>> [mailto:brailleblaster-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Michael
>>>>> Whapples
>>>>> Sent: Friday, January 24, 2014 4:49 AM
>>>>> To: brailleblaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>> Subject: [brailleblaster] Re: LiblouisUTDML and backtranslate
>>>>> string
>>>>>
>>>>> My understanding was that the project was to build a tool for producing
>>>>> Braille documents. Maintaining the original text and indexing it with
>>>>> translated Braille I believe is to remove the need for backtranslation,
>>>>> whilst allowing synchronisation of text and Braille (eg. for embossers
>>>>> with ink and Braille, to know where edited Braille is, etc).
>>>>>
>>>>> May be things moved on without me knowing and may be backtranslation is
>>>>> part of the project scope now. If it is may be someone could explain how
>>>>> it fits in.
>>>>>
>>>>> Michael Whapples
>>>>>> On 24/01/2014 09:43, Larry Skutchan wrote:
>>>>>> Isn't a reliable back translation one of the premises we build this
>>>>>> project on?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>> From: brailleblaster-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>>> [mailto:brailleblaster-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of John J.
>>>>>> Boyer
>>>>>> Sent: Thursday, January 23, 2014 11:11 PM
>>>>>> To: brailleblaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>>> Subject: [brailleblaster] Re: LiblouisUTDML and backtranslate
>>>>>> string
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The string does not have to be in xml format. That said, try to avoid
>>>>>> back-translation as much as possible. It is unreliable. Granted, there
>>>>>> are some bugs, but even under the best of conditions it can give bad
>>>>>> results. ViewPlus discovered this, and it wºas one reason they proposed
>>>>>> UTDML.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> John
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 03:26:32PM -0500, Brandon Roller wrote:
>>>>>>> Does the string that I want to back translate need to be in xml
>>>>>>> format like translateString? I can't find anything about
>>>>>>> backtranslateString in the liblouisutdml documentation.
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> John J. Boyer; President, Chief Software Developer Abilitiessoft, Inc.
>>>>>> http://www.abilitiessoft.com
>>>>>> Madison, Wisconsin USA
>>>>>> Developing software for people with disabilities
>>
>
>
Other related posts:
