Hi lars,
Thanks for the answers. Apart from my curiosity, I wanted to make sure that
the changes I was proposing wouldn't harm Norwegian Braille. It looks like
everything so far is falling neatly into place.
Bue
-----Oprindelig meddelelse-----
Fra: liblouis-liblouisxml-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:liblouis-liblouisxml-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] På vegne af Lars Bjørndal
Sendt: 21. januar 2017 10:23
Til: liblouis-liblouisxml@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Emne: [liblouis-liblouisxml] Re: SV: Capsnocont apparently doesn't do any
thing
Hi, Bue!
You wrote:
As I understand it, according to the Norwegian rules, words in all
caps should not be contracted, hence the capsnocont opcode.
I have two questions about the Norwegian rules:
1. In grade 2, do you always mark capital letters with capsletter sign
(like UEB rules) or do you normally skip marking the first letter of
sentences and names etc. with capsletter sign (like the ole British
rules and Danish rules?
2. When you do mark capital letters at the beginning of a word, can
these letters be a contraction?
In other words, does capsletter also act as letsign at the same time?
-----Oprindelig meddelelse-----For a description of the software, to download it and links to project pages
Fra: liblouis-liblouisxml-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:liblouis-liblouisxml-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] På vegne af Lars ;
Bjørndal
Sendt: 18. januar 2017 21:14
Til: liblouis-liblouisxml@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Emne: [liblouis-liblouisxml] Re: Capsnocont apparently doesn't do any
thing was : 8 dots contracted with caps
Hi, Bert!
You wrote:
Haven't investigated it deeply, but it seems that you're right. Lars
has also noticed it some time ago (January last year).
I don't know when this regression happened. It is a feature that is
used very little (only in Danish and German) and apparently it has
no tests at all.
I think I provided a test. We need the feature also in Norway. I.ve
attached the test again, to this mail.
Thanks and regards, Lars
2017-01-16 21:04 GMT+01:00 Bue Vester-Andersen
<[1]bue@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
Hi Bert,
I have just tested capsnocont with the attached table:
Text: foo bar foobar
Expected: f b fb
Tests ok
Text: Foo Bar Foobar
Expected: ,f ,b ,fb
Tests ok
Text: FOO BAR FOOBAR
Expected: ,,foo ,,bar ,,foobar
Actual: ,,f ,,b ,,fb
As far as I can see, capsnocont makes no difference at all.
Or have I misunderstood something?
Bue
References
1. mailto:bue@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
For a description of the software, to download it and links to project
pages go to http://liblouis.org