[gui-talk] Braille Reading

Wed Dec 10 22:20:46 UTC 2008

Dot 4 is the at sign for use in email addresses 

-----Original Message-----
From: gui-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:gui-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org] On
Behalf Of Rafal Charlampowicz
Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2008 8:34 AM
To: NFBnet GUI Talk Mailing List
Subject: Re: [gui-talk] Braille Reading

Hi and can anybody help me with the "@" character. Is in grade II dot 4 or
dot 4 and 2346 or something different and are e-mail addresses abbreviated
that way? I need grade II for shortening an e-mail address on business card.

--- 
Greetings
Rafal

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Lloyd Rasmussen" <lras at loc.gov>
To: "NFBnet GUI Talk Mailing List" <gui-talk at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2008 2:30 PM
Subject: Re: [gui-talk] Braille Reading

> In Grade 3, dot 5 v stands for "love".  Dot 4 v is the contraction for
> "live".  Grade 3 has almost 600 contractions; Braille shorthand is more
> chaotic and contextual.  Grade 3 and Braille shorthand demonstrate that a
> system like Braille can have too many contractions, which can slow down
> comprehension.  Whether contracted Braille (formerly called Grade 2) or
> uncontracted Braille (formerly called Grade 1) inhibits fast reading more
> is still sometimes debated.  But we are getting quite far from the
> graphical user interface in this thread.  I am one of those people who can
> read a little faster than 200 wpm, one-handed.  I never got much help out
> of my right hand for reading speed.  I also have a time convincing people
> that if you read one-handed, it is likely to be with your non-dominant
hand.
>
>
>
> At 01:19 AM 12/10/2008, you wrote:
> >Sometimes reading a little slower improves comprehension -- I mean, when
I
> >was a print reader I used a CCTV and read (frankly) too slow for my
taste,
> >but in so doing I picked up things like spelling and writing technique in
> >the various things I read -- not just surface content.  This helped me in
> >the long run. Rather than scan something several times to get the
meaning, I
> >studied it carefully once or twice and had a good understanding of it for
> >future reference.
> >
> >BTW: Doug, is dot5v in grade 3 really equivalent to "live"?  I thought I
> >knew grade3, but I obviously missed that one...
> >Yes, rearranging dots can make some funny meanings.
> >Happy reading.
> >--le
> >
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "albert griffith" <albertgriffith at sbcglobal.net>
> >To: "'NFBnet GUI Talk Mailing List'" <gui-talk at nfbnet.org>
> >Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2008 4:50 PM
> >Subject: Re: [gui-talk] Kindle books
> >
> >
> >I attended school with 25 blind students and our instructor having a
blind
> >child herself emphasized reading and writing skills.  Our comprehension
was
> >better than the sighted students we occasionally had classes with but our
> >reading speed suffered by comparison. Admittedly, this is a small sample
but
> >it and associations with blind people over a lifetime have confirmed the
> >conclusions I mentioned in an earlier post.  Will my data stand up to
> >rigorous inquiry?  No.  My sample is too small just to mention one
obvious
> >flaw.  However, I think it's worth mentioning that many blind adults
still
> >do read at slower rates than their sighted counterparts and I believe
> >they've had time for self improvement if that were possible.
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: gui-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:gui-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org] On
> >Behalf Of Doug Lee
> >Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2008 5:21 PM
> >To: NFBnet GUI Talk Mailing List
> >Subject: Re: [gui-talk] Kindle books
> >
> >Let's be careful to distinguish facts from drawn conclusions, if we
> >plan to address this Braille versus print speed issue here...
> >
> >Fact: On average, print readers read faster than Braille readers at
> >this time.
> >
> >Fact: On average, blind people that read Braille don't read it as fast
> >as 250 words per minute.
> >
> >If anyone doubts those two, I'm all ears; but I acknowledge them as
> >known facts.
> >
> >Now, as to what they mean...
> >
> >Those facts do not, I say with emphasis, NOT, mean that Braille is
> >slow by definition, due to mechanics or anything else.  That's just
> >one possible explanation of the facts, and I think the very existence
> >of people that read Braille quickly rules out that explanation.  We
> >have proven that Braille can be read at up to 400 words per minute by
> >having people actually do it.
> >
> >So why so few such examples of fast Braille readers?  I think it's
> >because there's little emphasis on teaching fast Braille reading
> >nowadays.  That has nothing to do with Braille's effectiveness as a
> >tool.
> >
> >The reason I am making such an effort to separate fact from conclusion
> >is that not doing so has, historically, been the root of a number of
> >famous misunderstandings, discriminations, and outright denials of
> >individual and collective success.  Recall the many arguments waged
> >over race versus level of education:  We know by now that color of
> >skin does not affect ability to learn, but in our history, this
> >obvious truth was not always accepted.  Recall the 70% (or greater)
> >unemployment level of blind people:  We know that blindness does not
> >directly stop us from working.  Even consider that reading speeds and
> >even the ability to read at all is much lower in certain countries
> >than here:  We know that this is not due to some mysterious
> >geomagnetic interferance causing those countries' citizens to fail
> >reading tests. :)
> >
> >I assert that the reason Braille appears slow by average example is
> >that it is, by average example, not taught sufficiently to produce a
> >different result.  I assert that this is the same sort of cause one
> >should see for the other examples I just gave:  imbalance caused by
> >lack of opportunity.  I assert these things, and I wonder, can I call
> >these "facts" yet, or are they still in dispute?
> >
> >On Tue, Dec 09, 2008 at 03:56:47PM -0500, albert griffith wrote:
> >While they are some real fast Braille readers here's an example to put
the
> >issue in perspective.  In 1980 Arkansas Enterprises For The Blind trained
> >people to work for both the social Security Administration and the IRS.
To
> >qualify people had to read Braille at 100 words per minute and at least a
> >third of the applicants didn't meet the minimum standard.  All of the
> >applicants had high school diplomas and at least half were college
degreed.
> >The mechanics of reading Braille are quite slow by comparison to print
> >reading for most Braille users.  Of course there will be exceptions.
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: gui-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:gui-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org] On
> >Behalf Of Baracco, Andrew W
> >Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2008 12:03 PM
> >To: NFBnet GUI Talk Mailing List
> >Subject: Re: [gui-talk] Kindle books
> >
> >The fastest Braille reader might be able to keep up with the average
> >print reader.  As was said before, it's a whole different experience.
> >The Braille reader can only perceive what is under his or her fingers.
> >The sighted reader can perceive the whole page at once.
> >
> >Andy
> >
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: gui-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:gui-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org]
> >On Behalf Of Cindy Handel
> >Sent: Monday, December 08, 2008 6:50 PM
> >To: NFBnet GUI Talk Mailing List
> >Subject: Re: [gui-talk] Kindle books
> >
> >Well, reading print may be fast for some sighted people.  But, I've
> >known blind people who have been able to read Braille so quickly that
> >they couldn't talk fast enough to keep up with their Braille reading.
> >So, it all depends on the time you devote to it and the technique you
> >use to read, either print or Braille.
> >
> >Cindy
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "tribble" <lauraeaves at yahoo.com>
> >To: "NFBnet GUI Talk Mailing List" <gui-talk at nfbnet.org>
> >Sent: Monday, December 08, 2008 4:15 PM
> >Subject: Re: [gui-talk] Kindle books
> >
> >
> >The nice thing about reading visually is to be able to see spellings and
> >page layout and pictures, if any. Also, you can mark passages or write
> >notes
> >in the margins.
> >But is it faster? I think it is actually -- I don't speak for myself as
> >I
> >never had good reading speed due to my declining vision, but I know
> >people
> >who polish off books in a couple of days that take me a lot longer
> >reading
> >either online or listening to a recording or DAISY book.
> >I think DAISY is the best thing that has come along in a while. now if
> >the
> >volunteers at bookshare would use the features a bit more effectively,
> >it
> >would make navigating the book easier. I mean, sometimes an entire book
> >has
> >only one navigation element marking the start of the book. So all you
> >really
> >have is your current reading position, which lasts from session to
> >session,
> >and the start of the book to jump to, and that's all.  Very terse
> >markup.
> >oh well -- One of these days I'm going to scan and markup a book and
> >submit
> >it to bookshare and then I will be able to complain legitimately.
> >Happy reading.
> >--le
> >
> >
> >...
>
>
> Lloyd Rasmussen, Senior Project Engineer, Engineering Section
> National Library Service for the Blind and Physically Handicapped
> Library of Congress    (202) 707-0535   <http://www.loc.gov/nls>
> HOME:  <http://lras.home.sprynet.com>
> The opinions expressed here are my own and do not necessarily represent
> those of NLS.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> gui-talk mailing list
> gui-talk at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gui-talk_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
gui-talk:
>
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/gui-talk_nfbnet.org/rafalchar%40gmail.
com

_______________________________________________
gui-talk mailing list
gui-talk at nfbnet.org
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gui-talk_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
gui-talk:
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/gui-talk_nfbnet.org/ceoallen%40verizon
.net