[Unified Braille For All] Four minor typos in Code Comparison 1
osterhauss at tsbvi.edu
Sat May 12 16:22:36 CDT 2012
Hi Robert and all,
Thank you so much for finding the typos in the *Comparison, Part 1*, brf
document. My Texas team and I compiled these comparison documents, and we
indicated on the last page that we welcome comments, especially if any
errors are found. We want these to be 100% accurate. I checked the pdf
document, and it does not have these errors. We created many different file
formats of these comparison documents in an attempt to meet various
requests. Unfortunately, in the process, I think the latest corrected
version was not always used.
Please be patient with us. If any other reader finds additional
errors, PLEASE do let us know. Also, if you find something that you think
is an error, but you're not sure, please let us know that as well.
For instance, Robert cited "p. 6, the very last line of the page, the
closing parenthesis in the example identifier is wrong. It's transcribed
here as dots 2-345, but again, should actually be written as dots 5-345."
However, this is not an error. What appears to be a closing parenthesis to
Robert is not. For any print pdf readers, we are referring to Example 6,
Simple Superscript Problem with Identifier, on page 4. The last two cells
in that math expression are actually dots 1-345, not 2-345. The dot 1
represents part of the UEB construct for the superscript "1" (along with
the preceding numeric indicator) and the dots 345 are UEB grouping symbols.
I refer to these UEB grouping symbols in my presentation to BANA as "ghost
parentheses" because these are not found in the print example. They are
unique to UEB. They are required because of the way UEB chooses to
construct superscripts (or exponents). You will not find these in the
Nemeth Code or in NUBS.
It just happens that the Part 2, Example 6, also deals with superscripts
(not sure how that happened). Here is a direct quote from my presentation
regarding the Part 2, Example 6:
"In Example 6, we can see the progression of three different samples of
superscripts. Nemeth and NUBS follow a systematic progression. UEB appears
to be doing the same by placing a grade 1 symbol indicator before the
superscript indicator until we get to the last sample, where it suddenly
introduces a grade 1 word indicator and new grouping symbols that are not
included in print. We think of these as 'ghost parentheses.' "
To read more about this topic, refer to Section 11.4.3 entitled *Algebraic
expressions involving superscripts *(print page 173) in *The Rules of
Unified English Braille, June 2010*, ICEB (International Council of English
Braille) and Section 7.3 entitled *Algebraic expressions involving
superscripts *(print pages 35-36) in *Unified English Braille Guidelines
for Technical Material* (This version updated October 2008.).
Robert, if someone of your stature, Professor of Linguistics at Rice
University, long-time braille reader, and expert on UEB, did not interpret
this correctly, imagine how an average elementary and high school student
will interpret these mathematics expressions. I think this is an excellent
example of the ambiguity of which I spoke. Believe me, the first time I
looked at these UEB examples, I was totally confused myself.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the UBA