Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Braille Grades #105

Closed
GouldenJen opened this issue Oct 4, 2023 · 9 comments
Closed

Braille Grades #105

GouldenJen opened this issue Oct 4, 2023 · 9 comments
Labels
eBraille specification Issue for the ebraille 1.0 specification Status - duplicate This issue or pull request already exists Topic - metadata Issue with the package document metadata

Comments

@GouldenJen
Copy link
Collaborator

GitHub tickets: #41 and #19
Requested metadata: Identifies any braille grades used in the file
NLS Dublin Core elements: N/A
alternative DC or schema.org: x-metadata brl:brlGrade OR
refines dc:Format?
Notes from GitHub tickets: Include “gradeless” option for music, Nemeth, other codes that do not have a grade
Notes from metadata team: Required if applicable? Use "refines" for braille code metadata or a separate x-metadata element?

@GouldenJen GouldenJen added the Topic - metadata Issue with the package document metadata label Oct 4, 2023
@bertfrees
Copy link
Member

An important thing to note is that you can use a numeric value for the contraction grade, or something more universal. The meaning of the numeric contraction grade is, indeed, local to a region. For example, for English braille, 0 means computer braille and 1 means (literary) uncontracted, 1.5 means partially contracted and 2 is fully contracted. But for German braille, 0 means (literary) uncontracted, 1 is partially contracted and 2 is fully contracted.

Liblouis uses a combination of both a numeric value and a more universal keyword ("none", "partial" of "full").

@wfree-aph
Copy link
Collaborator

Thanks @bertfrees for pointing out how ambiguous braille grades end up being. The universal keywords might be clearer- though if we did those, it would probably be best to change the metadata type from "grade" to "contractions".

@wfree-aph wfree-aph added the Status - duplicate This issue or pull request already exists label Nov 13, 2023
@wfree-aph
Copy link
Collaborator

Braille grade is required in the first draft of the specification and found under section 5.2. Closing this issue as completed.

@egli
Copy link
Member

egli commented Jul 1, 2024

I'm not sure this is really completed. I'm looking at the preview where the metadata guide has been integrated. There is no mentioning of braille grade in the metadata section.

Maybe you are saying that the braille grade is integrated in the braille code? This sort of can be read into the text but doesn't seem to be explicitly mentioned.

@egli egli reopened this Jul 1, 2024
@mattgarrish
Copy link
Contributor

It's currently listed as a required property in the metadata section but that section only lists a few properties we discussed very early on. it's not in the metadata guide so we'll lose that requirement in the open pull request.

I assume the property should be brl:grade, but are there any requirements on the value?

@egli
Copy link
Member

egli commented Jul 1, 2024

As mentioned in the discussion in #208 there is no agreement on the meaning of a braille grade. So maybe we should drop the grade metadata after all and make it part of the brl:code or whatever that piece of metadata is going to end up being called

@bertfrees
Copy link
Member

bertfrees commented Jul 1, 2024

@egli I think that makes a lot of sense.

@wfree-aph
Copy link
Collaborator

@egli I think the idea to include grade information with brl:code makes sense. We can validate that brl:code exists but we won't be able to validate what it contains without some master list of braille code and grade terminology, but I also think publishers will have a vested interest to maintain naming conventions for at least their own materials.

@mattgarrish mattgarrish added the eBraille specification Issue for the ebraille 1.0 specification label Sep 27, 2024
@mattgarrish
Copy link
Contributor

I'm going to close this issue as it looks like it's been superseded by the discussions on the code property.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
eBraille specification Issue for the ebraille 1.0 specification Status - duplicate This issue or pull request already exists Topic - metadata Issue with the package document metadata
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants