Category: Let's talk
Well, the new format for producing braille has landed on me, and I find it interesting, but no problem as to adjustment.
It appears to go better with print, if you’ve ever been able to read it, and I can see after using it, why the changes were good.
It was pointed out to me that readers of new braille who’ve never seen the older format will be more lost when they receive something in the older format. I’d not thought of that. I am thinking they’ll just see things as mistakes, so should be able to continue if they are well versed in braille.
What do you all think of all this?
Have many of you braille users encountered the new system yet?
I have, and I think it is nonsensical! Because, as I've told you off here, people, including us will be lost, they didn't change print, and how could they possibly know this system will be better? They can't, but I know that's a liberal thing to do, is change things just because you can. Now before anyone jumps on me, I'm not attacking anyone as it relates to politics. Wayne has asked for our thoughts, and I'm sharing mine.
Are we talking about that new UEB standard? If so, I'm not really familiar with it. I learned grade 2 braille in its older format back in the nineties, and I am familiar with it. I don't read braille a lot, aside from on my braille display, which allows both formats. I suppose I should look more into it?
I can't stand the UEB code and changes. I know it could have been worse, we almost lost the Nemeth code too, but I believe that was kept intact. Unfortunately, much as I dislike it, UEB is here now, so I have to suck it up and deal with it. I wonder though, how many blind people who are proficient Braille readers were involved in the decision to implement the new code?
it is what it is. personally I can't see what all the hoop lah is about. back when I was a kid and learning braille, this was in the early '60s, a lot of what they used was similar today. although having to change is ridiculous, we can and must change. there are three major ways to deal with change. 1. ignore it. 2. stick our feet in the sand and refuse tomove, or 3. whine and deal. to which category do you belong?
I couldn't agree more with Chelsea and Alicia about Useless/Unnecessary
English Braille. The code is only good for lazy producers, invariably sighted
ones, who think it will reduce the need for proof reading. For blind braille
readers,s it's inefficient and it takes up more space.
I'm indifferent regarding literary braille, however I'm very disappointed America is sticking with nemeth as it completely defeats the object of having UEB. Personally I think it's a shame countries don't want to move forward in at least uniting mathematical and scientific braille.
I haven't encountered it yet but from what I've heard, I doubt I'll like it. I understand the purpose for the changes but that doesn't mean I have to like them. lol
"ation and ally" are 2 of my favorite contractions. lol
Also, all the contractions that deal with words that don't need spaces like to when it precedes another word are going to be awkward. I'm probably not explaining myself well but I can't remember the name for those contractions.
I have no doubt I'll be able to read the new braille but I can't say that I won't stumble a bit at first.
I don't like it, but what can I do? Everyone's all happy about it, around my state, and I think that it's a royal pain in the neck!
I have to relearn what I've known since, 1980?! Since I was five bleeding years old? I have to, call myself barely litterate, cause I don't have a way to learn the UEB. I am waiting for a book to learn it. However, it's really stupid. What happens to all the old Braille books?
All the money, governments, donations, and private people paid to make sure some people who cannot see with their imperfect eyeballs, can finally read, and it's worthless!
Millions of dollars wasted, cause some people decided for the world of those of us speaking and reading English: "We are going to change your Braille!"
Millions of bucks wasted! Sorry, but it bothers the crap out of me!
Blessings,
Sarah
If I want to continue working for the schoolboard, I'll have to suck it up and get use to it, though I am spare for now as my student is in grade 11 and they do not wish to make things worse for her.
BTW, I'm sorry if I'm not opinionated. Hahahahaha!
I like the new UEB coe and here's why.
If I'm reading a scientific or technical article full of mixed content online, all the symbols are unique enough that I fully get it where is an underscore, a curly brace, a square bracket, etc. etc.
If you don't read mixed content, or when you are reading on a tiny little display, I wouldn't use the system.
Here's my major problem with the old system: Nobody really thought the Grade II system through. It was clearly designed for a humanities-only education. Even technical journals from the turn of the 20th century don't flow as smoothly and yes one can get context wrong in cases where you shouldn't have to worry about context at all.
If you look at the contractions they picked, for instance, clearly they did so for Shakespear, the King James Bible and similar works. Probably they accounted for Bernaise and similar propaganda, who knows.
Sure, one can switch in and out of computer Braille, but seeing just a code snippet or design parts intermixed with text in real time is where it's at for UEB.
They can't discard Nemeth because that system is specifically for mathematical equations, which while they may be expressed in computer programming, are not necessarily inherent in such.
Consider that within some of our lifetimes, at least, we've gone from a stagnant system where the humanities types got to decide what was put into Braiulle or not. From there till here, where with a Braille display, you can look at anything from an online publication and in realtime see the content as a sighted person would.
If you aren't doing any technical or mixed content, UEB is probably not very useful to you. Especially if you don't read any language but English. You can use UEB to tell what direction the accent goes, for instance, which makes a difference when reading a fragment of French content. Other symbols everyone else uses we now have greater access to using UEB.
I'm rather surprised at the emotionally charged way I've seen peple react to this addition though. I'd say by ecomparison, everyone on here is pretty tame. It does seem though that among some, brand loyalty between the two systems is pretty intense. I'm not loyal to any of the brands, but have noticed that BANA and Liblouis have been catching up re: mixed content.
Glad to see I'm not the only one who doesn't see the benefit of UEB Braille. It's beyond ridiculous, and anyone who seriously believes their claptrap about having asked proficient Braille readers like myself what we thought of this, is sadly mistaken.
Personally, I think they simply said that to try and persuade people it was a grand old thing...and as we see, Leo apparently drinks their coolade.
If I wanna continue to be literate, of course I'll have to suck it up and deal, but that doesn't mean my feelings will change on the matter. I mean, as I've said, no one has come along, or will soon come along, and say print needs to be changed. If they did, sighted people would be up in arms, and just as "emotionally charged" or however Leo said it, as we are...and rightfully so!!
Hadley and your local lending library has a training book on it.
However, if you've been reading braille, I really don't think you'd need it Sarah.
I'm a braille proofreader, so I've encountered a lot of UEB. It takes some getting used to, but I haven't found it that to learn.
I guess your definition of drinking the kool-aid and mine are quite different. I expressed I've got no brand loyalty. And I merely described the uses to which UEB seems most fit.
And the reason they don't overhaul print is they can and do add new symbols for things all the time, but you're not stuck with a 3x2 or 4x2 matrix as we are with Braille. You don't have to substitute out some symbolic representations in order to include others. Mathematically the reason for why is just straightforward.
Symbols like the ae diphthong which were in common use up until World War II went out of fashion straight off.
There's plenty of others, including the types of font changes which change how things look enough that letters can look quite different.
With print, due to its relatively analog medium, it just happens and nobody ever even notices because for the most part you're not substituting out one symbolic meaning for another, applied to the same pattern in the matrix we call a Braille cell.
Oh, I'm very emotionally charged about it, Leo. I tamed my earlier post down, but believe me, get me on a rant about this, and I could go on for awhile. But Turricane is right about the three ways we can deal with change. I fall into the whine and deal category, as she put it. IF you want some candid truth, I fucking hate UEB with a passion, but I have no choice but to suck it up, since, like Chelsea, I don't think many, if any, proficient Braille readers were involved in the decision to implement the code. UEB is here to stay, so either I stop reading Braille, or I deal with it. I'm not about to stop reading Braille, so that makes my choice for me.
Except for two things.
Going out on a limb here, you don't seem to be a hard sciences type so don't need it for mixed content, or at least not for the precision.
Your screen readers will still allow you to pick UEB or U.S. Grade II or some other name that means the same.
Second to that, the Braille Authority of North America still is upgrading Grade II, if what I've read lately has any truth to it.
Anything you get from Bard's Braille section is still Grade II.
It's a new standard, and just like any nonenforceable standard, it will and it won't be implemented.
My guess in the U.S. anyhow, where we're monolingual and very far to one side of the language scale, you won't have any dealings with international content unless you want to. Anything done on paper will still be done in Grade II in the U.S.
UEB really does shine in an organic real-live content situation like a technical publication on the web where you aren't depending on a human Braille transcriber but on a machine to get all the rules right and in such a way as to make the most sense of the text. Braille as a system never accounted for science types before, it merely had systems added on to it to "help with that," as it were.
For paper, there's no rational reason to switch unless they want to. And I'm unconvinced about the 2% rule, that UEB only takes up 2% more space. By making more accurate symbolic representation, it requires more multicharacter representation of symbols such as parentheses and brackets. And the disambiguation of some of the dropped cells content which makes sense when getting a machine to do it right 100% of the time and in real time when it's merely presented with a fragment, is not necessary when a transcriber human is looking to create an entire page of content for you.
I've heard this fear of "taking away" Grade II for years now, and if it were so, BANA would not be continuing to upgrade Grade II as you can see with the system NVDA and Apple both use. You would probably not notice it unless looking at mixed technical content though.
They've been carrying on about being forced into this since 2007. Dynamically, your screen reader is going to let you continue to use U.S. Grade II instead, and all your paper Braille is going to continue to be produced for the most part in Grade II. At least in the U.S. where as a culture we're decidedly not language-fluids.
Dislike it, or find it useless if that is what makes the most sense to you. But you need not fear its invasion. Your screen reader will continue to provide the ability to use the old system into the future no doubt. It's not the kind of thing a program would take away. And Bard in its BRF files are still Grade II , save the Braille music I download. Maybe it's me being a Braille music reader, but there's no telling what the content comes in; Grade 1, 2, some cock-eyed machinations of the two with interspersed German or something. I can read the Italian words of course as most can. But anyhow maybe it's having been a braille music reader has made me more flexible this way, who knows. An accident of education perhaps.
But you need not fear any invasion.
Also, lving out the worst apocalyptic fantasy available, Bard switches to the new format: They're not going to convert all the thousands of titles they currently have into UEB.
No, of course BARD or other agencies won't convert old content to UeB. But anything new that they do will be that way, and I do like to read new things. LOL. So, in the end, I still do need to learn and use it, one way or the other. Maybe not all devices will force me to use it, but then the problem is this. If I don't learn it, when I am finally forced to encounter it, I won't know what the hell I'm reading. I'm not nearly as fluent in the changes as I should be, because I've allowed myself to stay in my comfort zone for too long. But that's changing. You either move with the times, or you get stuck in the past. It's kind of like Windows. Systems have modes to make it look like XP, or now 10 can make it look more like 7, I think. That's very, very tempting, since like the old Grade Two, it's familiar, easy, and I dont' have to go through a ton of hassle to learn it. But either you learn new things, or you get stuck in yesteryear.
And fortunately if all you're dealing with is literary content you won't have too much to learn.
As long as I can use a braille display, I can choose for myself whether to learn it, and how I learn it.
UEB? hate it.
We've had it for a while and we've learnt from an early age, like our sighted peers, how to write, so why should it change from what we know? I know why they're doing it but it's a little late; adopt that from the beginning.
Well, the major blindness organizations are saying everything's going UEB. And, this is the first I heard that screen readers are still giving Grad2 options.
Either way, I have to know, cause I want to do what Little Sneaser does, or at least, get a license or certificate, or whatever, to be a proof reader. I can see, and I think the shadow kitty will agree, is that some of us that get certified, will be dealing with confidential treatment plans and proofing for the Mental Health Programs. I'm learning how to be a good salesman, so I can see that someone familiar with terms can proof read. Anyway, I whine too, and admit it. Like Alicia, I may whine, but I have to climb the horse, and stay on. Even if I despise it, and think it's just to waste more time for people who don't know it. And, you'd think, they'd have the nerve to make loads of copies of the "ABC's of UEB," but noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!
And, you bet that ripens me!One more thing: Not all U.S. services are staying Grade2, and IMO, I think, if you're gonna do it, just turn everything one way. It's like knowing two ways to say "bullshit"! How do you know if you use one term at place c, that term 2, will be used at place-D. Anyway, just my ten cents.
Wayne, you should've asked this on the rant board. Then, you'd get some really colorful stuff! Hahaha!
Blessings!
Sarah
I am currently taking the Hadley course for UEB, and much of it actually makes sense now that I'm learning why changes were made for specific things. For instance, I get why the "ally" and "ation" and "ble" contractions were dropped, and why the spacing rules have changed to include all words and therefore why the sign for "to" had to be dropped, so I was able to adjust to that easily. I also like that they added or adjusted specific symbols for things like bullets and asterisks, bold and italic writing, parentheses and brackets, and so on. In print, you encounter different markings or styles to emphasize pieces of text, so it makes perfect sense to me that there are now definite ways to show that in Braille too.
What I do have a hard time getting used to though is how URL's would now look. Apparently, you can now use contractions in them, and although I guess it can save space, I'm having a hard time getting used to reading and writing them that way. Same with writing things like passwords or codes and keys; I'm guessing contractions can be used for those as well. So if I ever came across any that include contractions or symbols other than letters or numbers, that will be hard to get used to also.
I think someone mentioned that UEB eliminates the need for computer Braille? If that is the case, then I do like that. When I would write some things on paper, I would use a kind of modified version of computer braille (Only excluding commas since I would use dot 6 as a capital sign instead). To me, it was easier to put non-alphabetical and non'numeric symbols in parts where I wouldn't have known how to do that with the older literary braille code. I actually liked using this to write notes or to jot down pieces of personal information. I was also wondering though how or if computer Braille would ever work if anyone had to write it by hand since there are no 8-dot slates or braillewriters that I know of. I had especially wondered about this for special characters like letters with certain accent marks. But I like that UEB seems to be the answer to that.
I can't say that I, love, UEB, as there are some things I'm still getting used to, but I can understand many of the changes, and I do like the additional symbols and indicators there are now.
No I never said computer Braille would be no longer necessary. At least those of us that program or otherwise need to look at things in an expressionary context need a character-for-character representation like Computer Braille.
The new format is on paper too Leo. It is across board on all new material.
I have it in some magazines I receive.
I too will start practicing using it when I write. I do a fair amount of braille I write, so I may as well write it so it can be read by anyone using the new form.
Certain symbols it becomes immediately beneficial to write that way, like plus and equals, as well as parentheses and the like.
Maybe. However, I still dislike the whole thing. I feel like the grownup who's ashamed to admit he/she cannot read, and never learned how. It just is difficult.
Blessings,
Sarah
Because I don't have enough shit to try to master, IOS, OSX, and Windows all with adaptive tech, and now I gotta relearn to friggin read? No thanks. I freely admit, I'm just not that smart.
I just wish they'd leave Braille alone.
Personally, I hate UEB! I have to learn it this year and I'm like, it takes even
longer! Personally, I love the to, by, ally, and ation contractions but they're
out. :( I don't see why they need to change it. I'm perfectly fine with grade 2
braille and I'm probably gonna not get used to UEB. But, like sarah said, I'm
going to suck it up. :p
@post 25: Oh OK; I misunderstood what I thought you were saying in a previous post. *smile* That makes sense then that computer braille will still exist.
I have encountered UEB in my current math textbooks several times and don't consider it an inconvenience. To be fair, I have been learning braille for some time so I am not yet set in my ways when it comes to reading either code proficiently. Therefore I believe I am finding it easy to adapt and to learn new changes. I'm glad that there aren't many.
While there are definitely some changes with this new form of braille, I think that a few posters are overexaggerating it a bit. For example, while there are some things that you will have to relearn, you're hardly illiterate. Yes, they got rid of a few contractions, and changed a few things around, but most things are still the same. Most things are still the old braille that we've all been reading for many years, just with a few modifications. Whether these modifications are for the better is up to each individual person's opinion. I for one am glad that we've got a pretty unified code now. Seriously though, it's not as bad as you all think. Calm down, take a few deep breaths, do some UEB exercises, and you'll live, I'm sure!
So, MD, what happens to the old NLS books? Loads of federal bucks went into translating them, and are they "worthless?" So now what?
Blessings,
Sarah
Nothing needs to happen to the old NLS books. At least right as of now. Consider this though as well: many books were written hundreds of years ago. I'll use Romeo and Juliette as an example because well, what the heck. These books were written in an older style of English that no one even pretends to speak anymore. However, these books were not translated into modern English (as far as I'm aware). People still seem to read them though. It might be an exercise to the reader, sure but it is still doable. Grade 2 Braille might be a small exercise to the person who only knows how to read UEB braille, too but I am reasonably confident that they'll be able to read them as well. As others have said though, and as everyone needs to remember, I haven't heard of plans to phase out grade 2 braille completely.
Consider UEB braille something like nemeth code. You can learn it, and sure it'll be a great help to those who will need it like some of us do. Perhaps UEB is something that people should take it upon themselves more to learn, but it isn't an absolute must because of the similarities. At least, not at the present times. This may some day change though.
To the poster who claims print has never changed:
In Spanish specifically, older works like El Cid had the letter h as an f.
Older German is so unrecognizable to modern Germans that my father in law when he was still alive, when he went to Germany to research their family ancestry, had to have someone specialist who could decipher the scripts. The forms of the letters have undergone sufficient change, not just meaning, spelling and usage like in English.
Many of us who have read music Braille books especially in the classical repertoire have had the curious fortune to read various mixolydian Braille sometimes called Grade 1-1/2 or some other name where some contractions exist and others do not I never learned the rules, just read the text. Similar results I had with this rather ancient-looking tome set of new Testament volumes, a veritable pants-wetting experience for the likes of Jonathan Edwards. Again, aside from the middle eastern warlord mythology written in Elizabethan English, it was transcribed using this mélange Grade 1-1/2.
I had a Shakespeare text in high school where the contraction gd was for god, gc was for grace, and a few other things I had no idea of. Naturally I was the bumblefool extraordinaire when called upon to read aloud my part in class.
Anybody else ever read Braille where the contraction for today is to-d and the one for tomorrow is to-m? I remember a copy of Great Expectations by Charles Dickens being like that.
I'm just remarkably unconvinced by the anti-UEB rhetoric, but I guess it's because I've ran smack dab into several different Braille systems were I had no cheat sheets and I don't know from whence they came. Not better, not worse, just different. And I'd guessed because of my experiences that Braille merely evolved over time like everything else does. Well, clumsy me.
Domestic Goddess said:
"Because I don't have enough shit to try to master, IOS, OSX, and Windows all with adaptive tech, and now I gotta relearn to friggin read? No thanks. I
freely admit, I'm just not that smart."
LOL
I'm sure you are smart enough but I hear you.
I just don't understand the anger. Most people read literary braille almost exclusively and it will barely impact you.
However, if you are someone who either, like Leo said, reads sciences journals, or for example wants to use braille to proofread it is incredibly useful.
UEB was created with technology in mind. That's why it hasn't existed this way from the start, because nobody knew that technology would develop as it has. Honestly the benefits outway the small inconveniences.
Well, someone asked for an opinion so I gave one.
Obviously, I'll be able to read it when I encounter it. My comment was hyperbolic in nature. :)
I wouldn't say I'm angry because, quite frankly, there are bigger issues in my life over which to get angry.
It really doesn't affect me one way or the other; I'm just not big on change. lol
I haven't encountered it yet so not sure how it will impact me. A close friend, on the other hand, who has read Braille for close to sixty years finds it very jarring to her reading experience. From what I've read in this thread it doesn't sound so bad, but then Braille is fairly new in my life where as for her, it has been her main form of media for almost all of hers.
Because I reread my posts and can see how someone might think I'm one of those highminded accepters of change:
I have yet to learn to use the Dvorak keyboard layout which is supposed to speed us technical types up, I tried it for a month 13 years ago and failed.
So no, I'm not here to criticize people on account of willingness to change or lack thereof. It's all in the tradeoffs, what you think you're going to get out of the deal.
People 20 years ago said that the Dvorak layout being available in Windows would mean us poor QWERTY users would be out of luck. I've been typing since I was 6. Well, no; much as Dvorak would be a speed improvement, I'm still not moved over to using it. 20 years on.
So, while I've made a few points about Braille having evolved in various directions over time, no, I'm not saying change for the sake of change. I can't; I still use the standard QWERTY layout even when I've worked on teams where almost everyone was a Dvorak user and trying to pressure me into using that.
If you run into it, most likely you won't notice except the occasional word you expect to be contracted but isn't. People may be right about proofreading, I'm not a Braille transcriptionist or proofreader. All I can speak of is on the technical / scientific front.
I still stand by what I said about your small cell phone Braille displays; UEB is just too bulky for literary braille on such small displays. My opinion.
But anyway not wanting to come off as a change snob, so openly admitting I have not changed my keyboard use. Hell, the editor I use for programming I've used since 2000 ... with its updates of course ... and have never switched because of all the macros and other extensions I've bot for it that makes my work faster and more precise. So there ya go; I can acknowledge the tradeoffs of UEB and at the same time admit there are places I'm hopelessly luddite-ish when it comes to change. Lol
I'm in agreement with Domestic Goddess.
I'm averse to change, and I loathe UEB. My use of Braille is literary, and for that, I see no advantage to these changes. I guess I understand the reasoning, some of it, but it just bugs the hell out of me, personally. No, no one consulted me as a Braille reader, either.
I've read Braille for about 40 years now, and don't appreciate what is familiar to me being altered! It just irritates me no end to see what seems unnecessary spacing surrounding "with" "The" "For" "by" and "of",. And "com" written out, as well as "into." "to" and "by."
Most of my reading is on the Braille Edge, these days, and I see these changes in BRF files which I've translated from text. The translator needs an option to use the old rules!
None of it is so complicated that you'd need to study, in my opinion, Sara.
I didn't actually realize there had been changes at all, until I began noticing "ble" written out, and "ally" and "ation", and such things, and Googled it, out of curiosity, because I assumed it was just some computer translation error. And it made me angry. Not so angry that it's a big issue and I continually bitch about it, but still... I think I red that changes were made to the rules in the 90s. This thread title suggests that there are newer rules, still. How new are these changes we're talking about?
Of course, I'm also partial to the even older books from the 50s and earlier, where you'd see, for example, the word "dear" written as D EA-sign R. *smile* No doubt people reading that were as unhappy with the later changes, too.
Well, I am interested in certifying as a Proofreader, so I need to know all there is.
I amalso not fond of change. Any kind of change. I even dislike moving, though, it feels like I do it too much. I'm in a personal situation now, where I will have to accept changes in my life, so I have to get over myself. However, "Getting Over It," and liking it, are definitely not, the same.
I guess I'm whining, because, like Violet Blue, I learned Braille at a young age. I still remember Helen pressuring me to "Keep going! Keep reading! We are going to finish this page..." Even before I stepped foot one, in a school. So, As do many others, I complain! I, like others, have many things to get ticked about. I just am trying to get rid of stressful things, while they creep up like a school chum, on the first of April. Or, like my brother scared me last year. That was fun, but it made me anxious. I just am working on letting stressers go, and more come. So, I will gripe. The less stressers, the sooner I can get off my rear, and get back on my rear to work. LOL
Blessings,
Sarah
I'm afraid it's not true to say that literally braille is barely impacted by UEB. UEB
takes up approx 10% more space than it's predecessor, and you need to
remember that braille is already both bulkier and slower than print. UEB just
means that it is now 10% slower and more bulky than before. Also, technology
doesn't consume braille, people do, so to alter a code for the convenience of
technology is counterintuitive. I'm sure it is also not beyond the wit of man to
create a computer programme that can handle the odd capitalisations, numbers
appearing in website/company names etc, the reasons often cited as to why we
need a code more easily produced by technology. Bear in mind that computers
seem reasonably capable of powering space missions, and even the Eureka as
far back as the 1980s allowed it's braille table to be edited so this can't be the
most challenging of technological issues in 2015.
Yeah, unnecessarily cumbersome, I agree. I hope it goes the way of New Coke.
hadley has an entire course on UeB? I'd like to take it if this is what I'm going to be reading from now on. I'm a bit nervous about transitioning to writing it, but hey, no use griping it when the changes have already been made. I'll survive.
I agree with Mad Dog. The changes aren't such that you cannot understand what you're reading if you choose not to learn it. Writing it seems to be somewhat a challenge for me though. After I read the original BANA announcement, I switched my iPhone to UEB so that I could start becoming familiar with the code. I like it in some ways from the perspective of someone who teaches braille, because some of the rules are a bit more clear. However, there are still inconsistencies like the dropped D. It means a period in almost all cases, but still can mean DIS. WTF? So they also went about this in a half ass manor, not fully embracing the argument that it should be more consistent. I also agree that UEB kind of stinks for those using smaller braille displays, as you have to scroll more, but it's not quite that dramatic. If you have a 500 page document, for example, I can kind of see that as it would weigh in at 550 pages instead, but who embosses that much content anymore anyway? Sure, NLS does, and people in school districts do also, but in the grand scheme of things, I don't think it'll cost that much more money. And since it is only from January 4, 2016 onward, documents/books won't be retranslated, so no more money will be spent there either. And to those who don't think it's fare or whatever, do you also think that we should not have symbols that represent things that the sighted world has? When the last changes wer made to the braille code, society hadn't had to make use of things like the @, #, and _ symbol quite so heavily. But for technological reasons, they now do. As braille only has 6 possible dot combinations, how else could we keep up with society if not for modifications to the code? I suppose embracing some form of contracted 8-dot braille could have been an option, but people would have complained about that too. LOL.
Well, this topic has surely been an education for me. I thank you all.
I'm not sure the 10% increase in size is primarily a cost issue, though as you
say, it would be if you were embossing long documents. To me, it's a
productivity and efficiency issue. If you think of the lengths that screen readers
go to in order to enhance productivity (auditory cues instead of speech ones,
quick keys to jump between elements, the ability to summarise documents on
the basis of key words), it seems odd that people would wilfully change the
braille code in order to slow down reading. Also, why can't you have a sign that
would mean different things in different contexts? In the English language, the
word 'spring' can be a season, a source of water and a leap in the air. No-one
has felt the need to outlaw two out of these three contexts.
What about Braille books, for the lowly masses, that cannot afford a Braille Display? A ten-volume book, if we go by I forget who said it, that ten-volume book is now eleven volumes. Costing more to print by say: NLS, and more to mail by USPS. And, though it's "Free Matter," I'm not gullible enough to say: "Nobody pays for a big fat huge truck to bring it to your house."
Just a thought for the sore fingers.
Blessings,
Sarah
Until we have an internationally unified standard for the English language, I think it's unnecessary to have a unified English Braille code. Some people have mentioned their surprise at the negative reactions expressed here. Can you imagine the reaction in the US, if it was decided that we should adopt UK English spelling and grammar rules? Adopting a common standard for English doesn't seem too far fetched, but it hasn't happened yet. If and when it does, I'm sure the exchanges on this board will seem quite friendly. Perhaps English spelling rules will be changed to eliminate some of the strange inconsistencies. After all, it might be difficult for someone who is just learning English to deal with some of the unusual spellings that don't seem to follow the expected pattern.
In my previous post, I never said anything regarding the lengths of UEB braille compared to standard grade 2 braile. Yes, UEB braille definitely takes up more room on your braille displays or on paper. I have not yet tried writing in this new style yet. If I do though, I'll probably have to try to break some of the other habits that people like Scott have to work on breaking. Anyway, all I said in my previous post is that when you transition to reading UEB braille, you won't find yourself as lost as some of you seem to think you might. Not if you're already a proficient braille reader.
I can read it just fine. I'm not lost at all.
I even like it to a degree depending on what I'm reading.
ok here goes again.
someone said it is easy for transcribers to use and is for their benefit. if the person does their job with care and concern, it is a change that has to be made. one of my dear friends is a transcriber, and she'd lalugh yououta dodge. she went to classes etc.
as for print readers having changes, here is an example. the hash tag once was a pound sign and a dollar sign.
as for british and American spelling ai've figured that ouit a long time ago. all my life I've been told I'm average, and I've done it.
a lot of you people get can't and won't mixed up. you say you can't read this new braille. after picking up my first book a couople months ago, after about a half page I figured it out. again, I'm average. so you brain trusts should figure it out with no problem. but you can't so you won't. enjoy your day.
I thought the dollar sign was dots 2 5 6 before incirting the number, or is that only in the british code?
Numbers appear to be the same no matter which english code you use, not counting computer braille.
When I first learned braille, I remember the dollar sign being dot 4 followed by S. Maybe that was Nemith code though. As far as I know, it's still the 2,5,6 then the number sign.
Turricane was talking about print not Braille re: the pound / hash symbol.
And yes, DG I remember that too.
Someone mentioned UEB going the way of New Coke. Maybe you were being sarcastic, maybe not. But I think you have a point.
I use the mac, JAWS 17 and NVDA, all of which use Liblouis, using a new set of rules for North America. I'm talking Grade II here. They have obviously picked up on the symbolic distinctions even if they don't look the same as UEB.
Ed mentioned computer programs can account for these things, that's obviously correct. Deciding what rule gets applied in what context does not come from the software developers, but from the rule-makers. In this instance, the Braille Authority of North America.
I guess I'm saying you can see some symbols returning in Grade II, such as the way the equals, less and grater signs are now represented. The symbols I remember from my childhood.
They now have all the brackets and braces separated, and this is all new and all Grade II from the braille Authority of North America. And you can run it on your mac, your iPhone, JAWS 17 or NVDA, or all of the above. There may be some differences in each software package due to their respective customer demands. But the end of it all is better symbolic representation is a thing, be it UEB or upgraded rules for Grade II from the Braille Authority of North America.
For those who are passionate about this, I guess my best advice is see how you can become a contributing member of the organization, in this case the Braille Authority of North America.
We all have3 changes that bug us. I hate the fact that the Oxford dictionary now claims that using "literally" and "figuratively" interchangeably is now proper usage.
And yet other changes, like allowing for the singular usage of the word "they" as a gender-neutral pronoun, I think is a wonderful idea that far exceeds the "she or he," s/he, him/herself, and so forth from my youth, very clumsy.
So in the end, we all get some stuff we like and some stuff we don't.
oh leo, you just gave me another reason to take blood pressure medication. "literally" and "figuratively" are not the same at all. what he he hocky sticks are they thinking about? you are correct about the dumbing down of the language. lookfor those of you who might not believe this, look back at articles and books published in the first half of the 20th century. the words middle schoolers were expected to know as part of normal every day their vocabularies are astounding. it makes me wonder what these kids nowadays do for 6 to eight hours a day. good grief my age is showing. guess I better tuck it in.
I didn't know we can now use they as a replacement for himself/herself, or whatever it is. It makes me cringe when I hear it because it just sounds wrong - too much high school grammar - but yet, it certainly makes much more sense.
Good point about what kids learn, now. Frankly, I wonder. Some teachers have one way, and others are more strict. Which, is what took school and made it difficult for me. I had to learn things on my own. It wasn't till my 30's, that I could post an essay-type explaination.
You start out writing what your favorite summer activity is, and six months later, you have to type a ten-page paper on the achievements of educators of the disabled. And do this, without knowing how to write a term paper. That's what frustrated me in school, and made it impossible. This new Braille is the same way. I still see the $sign as "dot4S". So when things change, the only ones who know, are members of a blind organization. This I feel is not propper. If we are supposed to learn, who is to train the adults??
Blessings,
Sarah
I wish we could go back to the "old" way of writing braille and not this UEB
foolishness... Braille's hard enough for a sighted to learn (I've had a hard time
converting ink print text into braille because I'm not accustomed to looking at words
letter by letter and trying to find Grade 2 contractions in them), so to go and change
everything around once everyone's more or less learned and become accustomed to
using it is just plain mean.
I do like the old British convention of omitting the dot 6 to indicate a capital letter in
U.S. Braille... not only is it a waste of a cell space, it's also counter-intuitive especially
in the middle of a paragraph... once you've read the full stop (dot 2,5,6) or an
exclamation or question mark, you'd have to be a right idiot not to know that you've
reached the end of one sentence and will be proceeding to the beginning of the next
and as any writing convention goes, the first letter of a sentence is always capitalized.
Anyway, I suppose that I'll have to see if there are any inkprint versions of the
changes available and go and review them so that I can write so-called "coherent"
English Braille.
To the people who decided that this change was a good thing, I hope that you all get
a big lump of coal in your Christmas stockings next year.
I can think of instances where you would read a full stop and have it not be
the end of the sentence, thus having the next word not be capitalized. Besides,
the first letter in the sentence is not the only thing to be capitalized. What if you
have a name that is also a word, such a May, or Hope, or Faith, how would you
know its a name unless its capitalized? You could figure it out through context
clues, but that would take a lot of context clues, and there are many writers
who use names like that symbolically, so that the context clues actually point to
it not being a name, but the capital letter making it clear that it is actually a
name. Think The Phantom Tollbooth. So I think the dot six is a valuable symbol.
Or, just write using the system you know. It's your writing, and if you're not doing it professionally, just do it so you're understood.
That's the easiest response.
I think it would be odd to go without the capital sign but I'm a 'Murican, with all that that implies I guess.
I agree with you on that point... Dot 6 does have its uses like you say - for the first
letter of proper names, acronyms etc but even there, it's not consistently used across
English Braille... in addition to dropping it at the beginning of a sentence, the British
have also dropped it before the letter i when writing the pronoun "I"... I can tell you it
took some getting adjusted to when I converted from American to British braille when I
first came to the UK... all of that said, at least with UEB, one has a chance of being
understood when switching between the two writing/spelling conventions, unlike with
American and British sign language... those languages, while similar in intent (i.e.
communication between the hearing impaired) are two completely different beasties with
very few similarities.
Oh my, tghat must be difficult. I admit I know nothing of sign languages though the Wife has learned some in the past I think.
Sign language is just as bad.
there's like 3 different versions of the alphabet, depending on which country you're in, and this is just for the english language.
I don't know if things have changed, that was the case around 20 years ago.
20 years, of course, is a long time, so who knows, maybe it's different now.
Nope... I have a friend who is an ASL interpreter in Vancouver, Canada and she says
that British Sign Language is completely foreign to her... she'd have to re-train if she
wanted to go to the UK to work as a translator.
Oh dear! And, that's something else I didn't know. Thank you. I was told if I lost too much hearing, to resort to Braille, due to difficulties with my hands. Sounds like that's the better option, as far as "Easier," option.
Also, I just saw several jobs in my state where I can work with Braille.
I do agree I don't like it. But, reading British Braille, sounds even more difficult. Kate, you are brave! Out for now, but best wishes learning British Braille!
Blessings,
Uncle Sarah LOL
See, I'm perfectly ok with that. Why shouldn't british deaf people have their
own version of it? British nondeaf people have their own version of english, why
shouldn't deaf people? Same with Canada and america. I disagre with this
whole idea that everything has to be easily communicable between nations, and
so we have to use one unified set of braille codes of signs. If that were true,
language would lose all of its character, and I hate the very thought of that.
I agree with that. We can adapt.
Yes I've come full circle on this whole globalization of everything. Places, languages, local accents, lose their character when it's all for the good of the Party, Globalist Collective. I'm not into any of that shit, even though I have accustomed to certain changes in UEB for certain kinds of things.
But again, local vversions of Grade II like in north America seem to be trying to answer some of the same questions.
as for sign language, in every country deaf people have developed one. next to food, sleep shelter, and sex, communicating is one of the big three or four fundamental needs we humans have. additionally in each country there are regional differences. people who sign have told me that individuals from say Tennessee "talk" differently then people from Washington state. I guess it's kind of like an accent. in the usa, there are at least three kinds of sign language. they are the manual alphabet, made famous by the miracle worker movie with anne Bancroft and patty duke. this is how Helen keller and laura Bridgman the two deaf blind pioneers mainly communicated. then we have ameslan, which is American sign language. it's what deaf and hearing impaired people use in every day life. it's analogous to street talk. purists complain ameslan has poor grammar and sentence structure. kids who solely use it have difficulty writing and erading because the differences are so sstriking between the written word and how the communicate every day with friends and family in the close knit community of deaf people. to solve this perceived difficulty, some brain trusts in the world of academe came up with signed English. this mirrors how we speak. It very closely follows our spoken sentences and spelling etc. kind of like ueb don't you think? did you know that many hearing parents teach their kids sign language as infants and toddlers? apparently the signing part of our brain with the hand motions etc develops more quickly then our vocalizations. it is thought that if a hearing child uses sign to ask for things and convey simple concepts he/she tends to whine less. oh my how I do go on. for whatever reason signing has always fascinated me. you can wake up now. enjoy your day.
I guess you could add that the seeing and hearing speak with signs all the time.
It be different in different places I'd think.
The ASL system we use in America more closely resembles French grammatical structure, as the person who came to America and started to formalize sign language was from France. Yes, BSL is completely different from ASL, the 2 languages have almost nothing in common. Even the manual alphabet, which is where you mold your hand in to certain shapes which symbolize each letter, varies significantly in the UK as opposed to North America.
I don't think it ever should have changed. It's like telling a fully sighted
person that you're changing print.
You'd be amazed at how many types of print there are actually.
I am not going to rehash the whole argument that people keep trying to make about changing print. We have discussed it in previous board posts in this topic. Read the entire thread before you try to use the "changing print" argument.
the problem with those who disagree with the changing print argument is
that, though you are right to say that print has been changed, you are wrong to
equate that to the UEB braille. UEB was not created by a gradual change over
time of how people wrote a word or a symbol, leading to the original form being
forgotten. UEB was created whlesail by simply saying it was changed. This is my
problem. It has never happened that an entire writing system has been entirely
changed in the span of a few years, or even the span of a lifetime. Yes, they
have changed, we no longer write as people wrote in the 1700s, and if you read
of letters written back then, you can see the difference, but the problem is that
those changes happened over two hundreds years. Braille hasn't even existed
for two hundred years. So, though you are right to say that print has changed,
you are wrong to think so simplistically about the change. The changing print
argument actually has much more validity if you know anything about the
history of the written language.
But braille really hasn't changed entirely, just a small amount actually.
It isn't like it is bran new, or totally different.
Example the A B L E sign has been moved, so now A B L E is spelled out.
But that sign is still the number sign.
I switched the UEB in high school, so that I could write math on my iPhone and
braille note more easily.
I can't say I'm thrilled with the changes. I had no idea NLS was even going to make the switch until I went back and started reading some magazines from earlier in the year I'd let stack up, and there it was. I don't like the clunky waste of spacing, I don't like that fairly common words that used to be contracted are now spelled out letter by letter, can't even say I enjoy the new way they show urls--had no problem with the older computer braille they used to use. Also seems like how they shows caps has changed from good old grade2, some words that used to be capped in my Science News are no longer capped at all, while others that might have not been capped now get capped. I'm thinking this was an ill-concieved change meant to merge U.S. braille with that used by the Brit, and I'm sorry but we write differently than they do in print, so why not leave it the same in braile as well? I'm strongly considering canceling my braille magazine subscriptions I'm so irritated, and I certainly won't stop using good old grade2 when I write in braille.
Wow, this topic has really taken off, since I last posted to it.
Aside from the fact that UEB would cause people to relearn what we've always known, the other huge problem I have with the fact this new Braille system exists now, is that BANA *never* consulted with people who are blind; they just took it upon themselves to make changes to the Braille code. I'm honestly surprised that more people aren't up in arms about that, because it's a huge deal as far as I'm concerned.
Also, someone said that UEB takes up more space, which totally blows BANA's argument to pieces, where they were saying that it'd take up less space and be more efficient. Efficient for who, I ask?
Well, it was designed not for books, but electronic devices.
Sure, in books, you'll need a bit more space, but it isn't marginally more.
I hate it. It's fugly. I really got to know it during convention in Minneapolis when I was reading through the Braille programs, and I just won't bother with it. Fortunately I have other options, including buying a Braille display that will give me classic Grade II if I want it, supposedly, at least. Basically I'm done with this current iteration of Braille.
Resisting as long as possible.
Resisting the UEB changes is going to be very difficult for people. While most people aren't exactly over the moon about it, it is soon going to become the new standard. So, we're going to just have to keep changing with the times. As a previous poster said, even the NLS is starting to incorporate it in new magazine issues, and new books that come down the pipeline. Remember, writing styles are constantly changing. Whether they be print or otherwise. It shouldn't really surprise anyone that braille would be changing too.
chelslicious, I totally agree with your points. were we consulted? did we have a choice? in my opinion, it is patronizing and arrogant of some people some where to make such a sweeping decision. who actually is in the bana? i know it is the braille authority of north America. transcribers teachers and professionals I imagine comprise it. I don't mind the new braille. hey, I can adapt. that's not the point. it would have been nice to have been asked and to have actual blind people, gasp in shock, be considered to help make the updates. hey, why don't we all go have some privileged organization who obviously knows best for sighted people make changes in print. bet they'd love it. yes texting and computer technology have changed print. however it was done by groups of people who changed things to make things easier for them, not some organization. grrrrr. this still burns my biscuits. yes, the braille is fine. the way it was handled was and is not to my taste
Let's start a petition.
Well, if they'd asked, and I believe they did some research, if this board is a sample, they'd have been told hell no!!!
I'm for anything that makes it easier for all to get the blind the most content in braille, so I think it is a good thing.
It was an easy transfer for me.
I was ready to use UEB in 2007 or 2008 whenever you started seeing it. Still, I use it when it comes up. But newer iterations of Grade II on electronic systems are a bit more mixed-content-friendly. By mixed content, I mean, text, then code or a code snippet, or even pseudocode to describe something, then text.
Similar things occur with scientific works as well, minus the code, just a formula here and there. That stuff tends to read better with UEB but now reads pretty OK with the latest Grade II from BANA.
Clearly, Braille was never designed with the technical or scientific in mind. I've heard it said Grade II works best with either Shakespeare or the King James Bible.
Course not. Old Louis had no idea computers would ever be.
Laughing.
I use a Braille Sense, often with my iPhone. Because I utterly despise the new braille
code, I will continue to use the old code as long as I can. I don't even have to rely on
the brf files staying the same, if I convert it into text. I have been using braille for
fourteen years now, and quite frankly don't have the time, desire or energy to learn
the new code. Therefore, I won't. Maybe when I'm not being blasted in all directions
with high school level work and math for which I need the code, and English
assignments which I can write a hell of a lot faster with the grade 2 braille system, I'll
learn it. And that's a maybe. As of now I don't have to. I'm taking the liberty to not do
so.
I hate it a lot with a pashin. It is dome. and I do not agree with it. It also has too many rules.