[Blindmath] new to list with a question

[Bernard M Diaz]

Hi Susan (and Marsha),

Marsha WILL have problems transcribing .pdf, and I guess my
point is "don't start there ...".  However, that always needs
an explanation, which was the purpose of the long posting.

My "really hard to write" statement should be read as "really
hard to say", in other words - my advice (on the basis of my
experience this side of the pond, and with all the caveats in
the posting) was to use voicing systems not Braille - for the
simple reason that those proofing the maths are much more
likely to have hearing, than are likely to have Braille and
Nemeth skills! And it is the subject (maths pedagogy) that is
the point, not that Marsha is blind. It is/was hard to say,
because Nemeth has come up with a tool that is wonderfully
effective, and to suggest not using it is hard.  (I ignored
all the issues of UK/UK/European Braille and maths notations,
and the overlap with Wulfram notations, serial forms, etc ...)
Nemeth's Braille is MUCH better (to my poor mind) than several
other forms of maths notation serialisation and input possibly
including Knuth's Latex, as you point out. But, it is not widely
known,I believe it should be, but that is/was not Marsha's
problem.

I'm of course fully aware that writing/saying that is to
attract a massive reaction.  However, my point was threefold
a) what is/was the overall purpose - my implicit answer "to
understand and do the maths",
b) what is the fundamental of the "written" teaching tool
that is captured in the maths jargon - my answer "serialisation
and 2D layout", and
c) serial computers with serial storage and serial "programming",
not 2D paper, is the issue and is where basic skills have to be
acquired.

At the end of the day, the skills that Marsha will be tested
on are her mathematical understanding and application, and her
ability with the jargon - as she writes it.
With computers, and an appreciation that she must come to terms
with serialisation and 2D layout, the rest is just in "the dots",
providing there is a way for her to get her maths thoughts via
her finger tapping and voice into computer bits.

Which dots to use? Ah, now we are talking.  And maybe I should be
saying all this to Stephen Wulfram as it seems to be his radical
statements (for example in his book "A New Kind of Science")
that are quietly reshaping our understanding not only of maths
but also science and science research. [I should point out, I
have no connection other than reading his texts and using the
software with Stephan Wulfram and/or Mathematica ...]

But have we helped Marsha with her .pdf problem?  I'm not sure
we have ...?  With your post, she should have some more avenues
to go down. (And Marsha do read Susan's dotless Braille readme
it's really good/useful.)

Kind regards - Bernard Diaz.

Susan Jolly wrote:
> Hi Diz,
> 
> First let me compliment you on such a thorough and wonderful explanation of 
> the many problems that arise when attempting to convert some sort of typeset 
> mathematics intended to be read by a sighted person to Nemeth braille.
> 
> First I'd like to say that here in the US there are upwards of several 
> hundred sighted certified Nemeth transcribers who can look at print math and 
> enter correct Nemeth braille about as fast as they can type.  This should 
> not be surprising as you are likely familiar with one of the numerous 
> sighted mathematicians, etc. who can look at print math and enter the LaTeX 
> equivalent about as fast as they can type.  (LaTex is considerably more 
> cumbersome than Nemeth.) Of course, since almost no one in the UK uses 
> Nemeth braille, it is not surprising that you don't find Nemeth transcribers 
> on your side of the pond.
> 
> Our National Braille Association maintains a set of Forums where 
> transcribers can ask questions about braille transcribing issues.  Here is 
> the main page:
> http://www.nationalbraille.org/Forum/
> The Forum titled Mathematics, Science, and Computer Notation is the one for 
> Nemeth in particular.
> 
> You wrote that Nemeth Braille is "really hard" for you to write.  I'm not 
> sure what you meant.  I would certainly expect it would be hard for you to 
> directly enter braille using a mechanical embosser or braille slate or even 
> an electronic braille keyboard.  However, if you use the North American 
> ASCII Braille transliteration for the braille cells, it is quite easy to 
> type Nemeth from a standard keyboard as much of this particular 
> transliteration is based on Nemeth.  (You can change to Duxbury's SimBraille 
> font or any other font that based on the same transliteration to see the 
> black ink dots.)  I don't mean to imply that you could easily get all of 
> Nemeth correct with this strategy but you should be able to do quite well in 
> a circumscribed area although, as you hint, perhaps not logic.  Here's an 
> article I wrote about this:
> http://www.dotlessbraille.org/readnem.htm
> 
> Cheers,
> SusanJ 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Blindmath mailing list
> Blindmath at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindmath_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for Blindmath:
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindmath_nfbnet.org/b.m.diaz%40liverpool.ac.uk