          UEBC--The Basics
             July 2002

Q. What's the basic idea behind the Unified
  English Braille Code?
A. The most important goal is to enable a
  person who uses braille for literary material
  to go on to use the same braille code for
  technical material, simply building new
  knowledge upon the old without having to stop to learn a new
  braille code in the process. In other words, just
  like a user of print, a user of UEBC can
  proceed seamlessly from one subject area
  to another, learning only those symbols that are
  newly encountered in the new subject but not
  having to learn different braille representations for
  symbols that are already familiar.
Q. Can you give an example of where this is
  better than the present system of multiple
  codes as used in America?
A. The notation for "four dollars," written in
  literary code, is

  $4

  whereas in Nemeth math code it is
  written

  @s.

  and in American computer-notation code it is
  written

  ed.

  In UEBC, regardless of the context, it would
  always be written the same way, namely:

  @sbled

Q. Why did you choose to have the digits in the
  upper portion of the cell, as in literary code?
  Don't lower numbers work better for math and
  science?
A. After a lengthy and very careful evaluation of these
  two systems, and also a third system used
  commonly in Europe, the design committee
  concluded that the upper-number system works best
  overall, even for math in a general sense,
  despite the merits of the lower-number system in
  certain limited technical cases.
  One of the main reasons is that, whereas upper
  numbers clash with the letters a through j and so give
  rise to "indicator clutter" when such letters
  immediately follow, the same problem occurs when
  many common punctuation marks immediately follow
  lower numbers--and that the latter situation is far
  more common, even in math books. There are also
  other important reasons, spelled out in
  greater detail in a separate monograph in
  this series. In the end, the committee concluded that
  Louis Braille, the originator of the braille system
  as we know it, had made the right decision for a
  general-purpose code.
Q. Again referring to the "four dollars"
  example, why did you decide upon the "dot-
  4 s" form for the dollar sign?
A. This is one of many instances where symbols were
  assigned in a "family" pattern. The
  dollar sign is in fact a letter "S,"
  modified with bars in the same way that a yen
  sign is a modified y, a euro sign
  is a modified E, and so on. So this same
  pattern is followed for all of them--a yen
  sign is a dot-4 y, a euro sign is
  a dot-4 e, etc.
Q. Can you give another example of the
  "family" principle?
A. In UEBC, as in any code capable of
  handling technical notation, it is necessary to have
  distinct left and right parentheses. The
  assignments for parentheses, square brackets,
  curly braces and angle brackets all
  follow a family pattern:

  Left parenthesis: .gh
  Right parenthesis: .ar
  Left square bracket: .gh
  Right square bracket: .ar
  Left curly brace:
  Right curly brace:
  Left angle bracket or less-than
    sign: @gh
  Right angle bracket or greater-than sign:
    @ar

Q. So there are some changes from current literary
  braille, then?
A. Yes, but very few. When reading general
  literature, most current readers will hardly
  notice the difference. And that also ensures
  that existing material in today's literary braille will
  remain readable to users of UEBC in the
  future.
Q. Is there some reason UEBC should be based
  upon literary code? Why not start with one of the
  technical codes?
A. The literary code is the only code that every
  braille reader already knows. Also, the great majority
  of existing braille is in literary code, and more of
  that literature has enduring relevance whereas
  technical works tend to become obsolete more
  quickly. Consequently, basing UEBC on the
  literary code maximizes the preservation of
  existing skills and materials, as well as the
  traditional "look and feel" of braille.
Q. Can you give me some simple examples?
  What does "two plus three equals
  five" look like?
A.

  2 .! 3 .) 5



  Or, if you prefer your math unspaced:

  2.ff3.(5

Q. Where did the signs for plus and equals come
  from?
A. Both symbols have the "prefix-root"
  pattern typical of UEBC multi-cell
  signs. In both cases the root was the
  original choice of Louis Braille, in the lower
  position no doubt to contrast with the numbers--or
  letters in other cases--that are the principal
  elements of the equation. Those same symbols are
  still commonly used in math braille systems for other
  languages.
Q. Why add the dot 5 prefix?
A. We want to be sure that the plus sign is
  not confused with an exclamation mark, nor the
  equals sign with "were".
Q. How can you tell when two cells are to be
  read as one symbol, rather than two separate
  symbols?
A. In UEBC, there are precise rules for
  symbol formation, so that you can always tell where a
  symbol begins and ends, regardless of context.
  So, even if you don't happen to know
  what a symbol means, you know exactly what
  to look up in a symbol list. There is never
  any ambiguity as to the interpretation of a
  symbol; that is a basic principle of
  UEBC.
Q. Is ambiguity all that important to a
  human reader? In cases of ambiguity with
  current codes, can't the meaning usually be
  figured out from context?
A. If there is adequate context present, and
  if the reader is already familiar enough with the general
  subject area to know what makes sense and what
  does not, it is true that ambiguity can often be
  resolved. But those conditions do not always apply
  --and are even less likely to apply in
  technical notation. And although reader misunderstanding
  is the main potential problem with ambiguous
  braille codes, it is not the only problem.
  Computer programs can also be misled
  by ambiguity, and wind up processing information
  incorrectly.
Q. Can you give an example?
A. Let's say you are one of those rare computer
  users who are really happy with your operating
  system. Hoping to convince a sighted
  colleague of its merits, you write a braille
  paper where you abbreviate "operating system"
  to o, period, s, period in the sentence

  I really like my odds.

  You then use a computer program to translate
  the paper to print. Later your colleague,
  unaware of the braille ambiguity, wonders what you
  mean by (using grade 1 here for clarity):

  I really like my odds.

Q. I don't very often run into such cases.
A. Nuisance-level mistranslations that are
  traceable to braille ambiguities are actually quite
  common--although, granted, they usually just appear
  as strange but obvious "typos" in the print and
  so generally go unmentioned. The point is, they are
  quite unnecessary. If you are still not convinced that
  ambiguity is worth addressing, or would like
  to know more about it, there is a separate
  monograph in this series, on that subject.
Q. I've heard that UEBC'S upper numbers
  and two-cell signs lead to massive
  increases in the bulk of braille, as compared with
  current codes. Is this so?
A. No, it isn't. Some texts come out longer,
  some shorter, most about the same. Instances of the
  first effect can easily be exaggerated
  by selective examples. Of course it is
  true that a code designed specifically
  to minimize cell count when writing a certain
  kind of notation is likely to be more efficient
  in that sense for just that purpose. But that ignores
  the fact that there are other important kinds of
  efficiency--in dot density, reading speed and
  ease of comprehension, for instance--and also
  ignores the issue of consistent readability in
  all kinds of notation.
Q. Can you give some examples of what you mean?
A. First, Consider the algebraic notation for
  "eight plus two x equals zero". In
  today's American math code (nemeth
  code), this would be written

  8ingbbx = #"

  In UEBC, it would be written:
  8.ff2x .) 0

  Second, consider a line that might appear in
  a recipe, listing "two and two-thirds cups
  sugar". In Nemeth code, this would be

  bbthbbstccble cups sugar

  In UEBC, it would be

  22/3 cups sugar

  Third, consider an expression that includes
  words, such as a formula commonly encountered in the
  health sciences that says "LDL'-CHOLESTEROL
  equals total-cholesterol minus HDL'-
  cholesterol minus (triglycerides over
  5). In Nemeth code you must use grade
  1 for the words, writing

  LDLike-cholesterol
    = total-cholesterol
    -HDL-cholesterol
    comthTriglyceridesstenble

  (and, if the hyphens and minus signs were
  deemed ambiguous, some further means such as a
  transcriber's note would be needed to help
  distinguish them). In UEBC, you would have the option
  of staying in grade 2 and simply writing:

  LDL-CHOLESTEROL .) total-cholesterol
    .-Hdl-cholesterol
    .-ofTriglycerides.st5with

  without any worries about ambiguity.
  Fourth, consider a sentence containing an email
  or web address, such as "We found your listing
  at www dot teachers dot com". Using
  current American computer braille code, we
  would write:

  We found your listing at
    www.teachers.com.

  In UEBC, you could again elect to use grade
  2 throughout, without worry that any aspect of the
  address would be unclear:

  We found your listing at www.teachers.com.


























 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
