[UEB Maths] Teleconference dates

Wed, 15 Jun 2005 11:30:32 -0400

--=====================_7100469==.ALT
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed

Hello all,

That date (Wednesday July 13th here) works well for me.

It also works for me if we can stick with firming up basic UEB for now, 
leaving any question of specialist code extension to a future time and 
perhaps another committee -- thanks, Janet, for making it clear that that 
is what we're about. It should be possible to use dots 16 as a kind of 
special "font indicator" for the letter groups that happen to be 
recognizable math functions, when they appear distinguished in print, 
without also "contracting" the function names in the way that British 
Braille does. However, I'm unclear as to whether those who want us to 
include a math function series in UEB would be satisfied with such marking 
alone, or really want the names to be shortened as well. If the advocacy 
case could be put before us, it would help my thinking as to how the need 
could best be met within basic UEB. (But for sure, when the print makes a 
distinction between the function and the argument by any means, we can't 
have transcriptions simply reading "sinx" in UEB.)

Cheers,
Joe 
--=====================_7100469==.ALT
Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<html>
<body>
Hello all, 
That date (Wednesday July 13th here) works well for me. 
It also works for me if we can stick with firming up basic UEB for now,
leaving any question of specialist code extension to a future time and
perhaps another committee -- thanks, Janet, for making it clear that that
is what we're about. It should be possible to use dots 16 as a kind of
special &quot;font indicator&quot; for the letter groups that happen to
be recognizable math functions, when they appear distinguished in print,
without also &quot;contracting&quot; the function names in the way that
British Braille does. However, I'm unclear as to whether those who want
us to include a math function series in UEB would be satisfied with such
marking alone, or really want the names to be shortened as well. If the
advocacy case could be put before us, it would help my thinking as to how
the need could best be met within basic UEB. (But for sure, when the
print makes a distinction between the function and the argument by any
means, we can't have transcriptions simply reading &quot;sinx&quot; in
UEB.) 
Cheers, 
Joe</body>
</html>

--=====================_7100469==.ALT--