RNIB Braille Development Unit
Research report # 2
Evaluation of the views of a sample of
RNIB magazine subscribers on an
Anthology of Essays produced in UEB
Published by:
RNIB Braille Development Unit, PO Box 173, Peterborough, PE2
6WS.
Commissioned by:
Peter Osborne, Chair UKAAF (United Kingdom Association for
Accessible Formats).
Author:
Mandy White
For correspondence:
Tel: 01829 261853
Email: mandy.white@rnib.org.uk
Date: 3rd November 2011
Sensitivity: Internal and full public access
Copyright: RNIB 2011
© RNIB 2011
Citation guidance: White, M. (2011). Evaluation of the views of
a sample of RNIB magazine subscribers on an Anthology of
Essays produced in UEB. RNIB Braille Development Unit,
Peterborough.
Acknowledgements:
Many thanks to all the braille readers who read the anthology and
contributed their views on UEB to the research team
Thanks also to Sarah Home and Heather Cryer for editorial input.
2
© RNIB 2011
Evaluation of the views of a sample of RNIB
magazine subscribers on an Anthology of
Essays produced in UEB
RNIB Braille Development Unit
Prepared by:
Mandy White (Project Manager - Braille)
Table of Contents
A. Executive Summary ........................................................... 5
B. Introduction ........................................................................ 5
C. Method .............................................................................. 6
C.1 Design .......................................................................... 6
C.2 Participants .................................................................. 6
C.3 Demographic information ............................................. 6
C.5 Materials ...................................................................... 7
C.6 Procedure .................................................................... 7
D. Results .............................................................................. 7
D.1 Question 1 .................................................................... 7
D.2 Question 2 .................................................................... 7
D.3 Question 3 .................................................................... 8
D.4 Question 4 .................................................................... 8
D.5 Question 5 .................................................................... 9
D.6 Question 6 .................................................................... 9
D.7 Question 7 .................................................................. 10
D.8 Question 8 .................................................................. 10
D.9 Question 9 .................................................................. 12
D.10 Question 10 .............................................................. 12
D.11 Question 11 .............................................................. 12
D.12 Question 12 .............................................................. 13
D.13 Question 13 .............................................................. 13
D.14 Question 14 .............................................................. 14
E. Conclusion ....................................................................... 15
3
© RNIB 2011
Appendix 1 - Full list of comments in answer to question 13 ....... 17
a) The History of UEB ....................................................... 17
b) Issues around Increased size of documents in UEB ..... 17
c) Training and Reference Manuals .................................. 17
d) The proposed audience for UEB................................... 18
e) UEB/SEB or both .......................................................... 18
f) Consultation and timescale............................................ 18
g) Legacy Material ............................................................ 18
h) Rationale for the change............................................... 19
i) Changing just the technical code ................................... 19
j) Cost and availability ....................................................... 19
k) Capital letters ................................................................ 19
Appendix 2 - Full list of comments in answer to question 14 ....... 20
a) General comments about UEB implementation - positive
......................................................................................... 20
b) General comments about UEB implementation - negative
......................................................................................... 20
c) User Feedback ............................................................. 22
d) Reference and Training Material................................... 22
e) Speed of Reading ......................................................... 22
f) Increased space taken by UEB...................................... 22
g) SEB/UEB or both .......................................................... 24
h) Consultation and timescales ......................................... 24
i) Capital Letters ............................................................... 25
j) Specific Coding and layout observations ....................... 25
k) The proposed audience for UEB ................................... 26
l) General Observations on the braille code ...................... 27
m) Spelling........................................................................ 27
n) Affordability. .................................................................. 27
4
© RNIB 2011
A. Executive Summary
This piece of research was commissioned by The UK Association
of Accessible Formats (UKAAF), the independent standards
organisation in the UK. They were considering the possibility of
adopting the Unified English Braille code (UEB) in the UK and
wanted to know more about the views of the 'silent majority' of
braille users. An anthology of the winning essays from a Global
braille essay competition was produced in UEB and sent to all the
subscribers to an RNIB magazine. A week later the recipients
were all contacted by phone and asked a number of questions
about themselves, their braille use and what they thought of the
UEB anthology.
The research revealed that 73% of this cross section of regular
braille readers had heard of UEB. 37.9% could read it without any
difficulty. A further 49.5% could read it but more slowly than usual.
12.6% could read it but found it difficult. No one said that they were
unable to read it.
67% of the participants said that the braille coding didn't cause any
problems or that they noticed some differences but soon got over
them. Of those people who had problems with the coding the major
issue was the removal of contractions followed by the changes in
punctuation coding followed by the removal of sequencing (in UEB
wherever there is a space between words on the printed page
there must be one in braille).
Participants in the research had been given minimal information on
the reasons for the proposed introduction of UEB and they also
had not been given any information on the actual code changes.
There were therefore two qualitative questions dealing with both
the respondents specific queries on UEB and their personal views
on UEB at the end of the questionnaire. There was a range of
comments from people both in support of UEB and those who
didn't see the need to change. The main objection to UEB was the
increased space that it took.
The results of this research were included in a paper to the UKAAF
board in order to assist them in making a decision on the adoption
of UEB in the United Kingdom.
B. Introduction
The UK Association of Accessible Formats (UKAAF) was keen to
gather representative views of braille users on the new Unified
English Braille Code (UEB). In 2008 the Braille Authority of the UK
(BAUK) had undertaken a consultation of braille users. The
5
© RNIB 2011
consultation pack was sent out to over 4,000 users, producers,
intermediaries and stakeholders and 470 responses were received
back. Of those people responding 347 did not want to see UEB
adopted in the UK (76%). BAUK therefore recommended that
UEB should not be introduced at that time. Shortly after the
consultation BAUK merged with several other organisations to
form UKAAF. UKAAF returned to the question of the introduction
of UEB in 2011. RNIB had produced some research (Phillips A.
and Beesley L. (2011) Braille Profiling Project) which suggested
that the so called 'silent majority' would be more likely to support
UEB and less likely to respond to the type of consultation
undertaken by BAUK in 2008. UKKAF therefore commissioned this
piece of research where a sample cross section of braille users
were identified and all of them were then contacted and asked
their views on UEB.
C. Method
C.1 Design
The interview questions were designed to reflect both a
quantitiative and qualitative approach. The first 12 questions had a
specified choice of responses and the last two questions gave
participants the opportunity to discuss more fully their views on the
sample documentation and UEB more generally. Whilst emerging
themes are discussed in the main body of the report, Appendix one
and two list the respondents views in full, to these last two
questions.
C.2 Participants
RNIB distribute a number of monthly magazines and the
subscribers of one particular magazine were identified as being
likely to be interested in the sample material that had been sourced
in UEB. The distribution list of over 200 was reduced to 165 by
excluding
 Those with no telephone number
 Organisations
 People living abroad
 People who had expressed a desire not to be contacted
C.3 Demographic information
The demographic range of the group is as follows
 Under 19
0%
 19 - 39
4.9%
6
© RNIB 2011
 40 - 64
44.7%
 65 +
49.5%
 Not disclosed 1%
C.5 Materials
A sample of UEB was sent to all participants. The material was a
collection of essays written by braille users on how braille had
changed their lives. The essays were written by the winners of a
Global competition which is run annually. The essays were all
written or had been translated into English however the names of
the authors did occasionally cause some confusion.
C.6 Procedure
165 people were sent a copy of the Anthology of Essays. Just
over a week later the RNIB telemarketing team started to contact
the participants by phone. All possible interviews and call backs
were completed within 10 days. By this time, the team had
managed to secure the views of 107 participants
D. Results
In the results section, the answers to the first 12 questions are
given in the form of a table showing both the number of people
choosing a particular answer and the percentage of the
respondents choosing a particular answer. The results section for
questions 13 and 14 summarise the themes covered by the
respondents and the actual recorded responses are listed in
Appendix 1 and 2.
D.1 Question 1
Before receiving this anthology, had you heard of the Unified
English Braille code?
Answer Options
Yes
No
Response Response
Percent
Count
72.9%
78
27.1%
29
107 respondents answered this question
D.2 Question 2
Did you read the introduction to the anthology in Standard English
Braille?
7
© RNIB 2011
Answer Options
Yes
No
Response Response
Percent
Count
93.5%
100
6.5%
7
107 respondents answered this question
D.3 Question 3
Did you read any of the essays in the anthology?
Answer Options
I didn't read any of the document
I read the introduction but didn't
read the essays
I read part of an essay or part of a
few essays
I read one essay or a few essays
I read most of the essays
I read all of the essays
Response Response
Percent
Count
2.8%
3
2.8%
3
12.0%
13
32.4%
22.2%
27.8%
35
23
30
107 respondents answered this question
D.4 Question 4
Why did you only read the introduction?
Respondents were only asked this question if they responded to
Question 3 by answering “I read the introduction but didn't read the
essays”.
Answer Options
I didn't have time to read the
essays
I wasn't interested in the subject
matter
I wasn't interested in trying UEB
I was put off by the idea of capital
letters
I was put off by the idea of reading
Response Response
Percent
Count
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
33.3%
1
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
8
© RNIB 2011
a different Braille code
Other (please specify)
66.7%
2
3 respondents answered this question
104 respondents skipped this question
“Other” answers were:
I didn't really understand what it was about.
It's like music and it doesn't say what it is.
D.5 Question 5
Why did you only read part of an essay?
Respondents were only asked this question if they responded to
Question 3 by answering “I read part of an essay or part of a few
essays”.
Answer Options
I didn't have time to read any more
I wasn't interested in the subject
matter
I wasn't interested in trying UEB
I was put off by the capital letters
I was put off by differences in the
Braille code
I found the Braille difficult to read
Other (please specify)
Response Response
Percent
Count
42.9%
6
21.4%
3
21.4%
0.0%
3
0
28.6%
4
7.1%
21.4%
1
3
“Other” answers were:
I am a transcriber
I'm not a huge Braille reader anyway.
I was put off by the bulkiness of it.
14 respondents answered this question
93 respondents skipped this question
D.6 Question 6
Could you read the Braille in which the essays were
presented? (Please choose the option which is closest to your
experience)
9
© RNIB 2011
Answer Options
Response Response
Percent
Count
Yes, I could read it without any
difficulty
Yes, I could read it but more slowly
than usual
Yes, I could read it but I found it
difficult
No, I couldn't read it
37.9%
39
49.5%
51
12.6%
13
0.0%
0
103 respondents answered this question
4 respondents skipped this question
D.7 Question 7
Did you encounter any problems with the Braille coding when
reading the essays? (Please choose the option closest to your
experience)
Answer Options
The Braille coding didn't cause me
any problems
I noticed some differences to the
Braille coding I'm used to, but I got
over them
I didn't understand some of the
coding, but I could understand the
gist of the text
Some of the differences in Braille
coding confused me
The differences in Braille coding
made it impossible to understand
the text
Response Response
Percent
Count
14.6%
15
52.4%
54
21.4%
22
10.7%
11
1.0%
1
103 respondents answered this question
4 respondents skipped this question
D.8 Question 8
If you encountered problems with the Braille coding, were any
of the following aspects of the coding difficult for you?
10
© RNIB 2011
Answer Options
Introduction of capital letters
Removal of sequencing (where
small words such as and/for used
to follow without spacing in
between)
Removal of contractions
Changes in punctuation coding
Other (please specify)
“Other” answers were:
Response Response
Percent
Count
25.0%
17
42.6%
29
58.8%
48.5%
26.5%
40
33
18
Comments on Specific Coding Issues
 I did not like the ellipsis
 Don't like the Brackets (x3)
 Three full stops at the end of a line, I didn't understand what
they were
 I could not understand a 3 lower d sign at the beginning of a line
 At the beginning and the end there were a dot 5 and then a gh
sign which I didn't understand
 The titles, where brackets are used, looked like pause signs in
music.
 More space and brackets codes caused problems
 I could not work out the name of the first contributor (Jönsson)
 Extra dots get in the way
 The first essay has a sign that I noticed "In the Borderlands"
during part of it at the end of one of the paragraphs the
paragraph ends "I now have the words in my fingers". Between
the two paragraphs there are 3 full stops taking in a new line
and starting a paragraph. Why is this?
 Why does this system not use the sequential words as in
standard Braille?
General issues
 I found the UEB rather strange.
 For me constant change is a problem
 Did not like changes but would get used to it
 Would have liked more explanation about changes
 Concern as to how other contractions would be coded
68 respondents answered this question
11
© RNIB 2011
39 respondents skipped this question
D.9 Question 9
Finally, a few questions about you: Can you tell me which age
group you fall into?
Answer Options
under 19
19-39
40 - 64
65+
Prefer not to say
Response Response
Percent
Count
0.0%
0
4.9%
5
44.7%
46
49.5%
51
1.0%
1
103 respondents answered this question
4 respondents skipped this question
D.10 Question 10
How long have you been reading Braille?
Answer Options
less than 1 year
1 - 5 years
6 - 20 years
21 - 40 years
over 40 years
Response Response
Percent
Count
0.0%
0
1.9%
2
4.9%
5
21.4%
22
71.8%
74
103 respondents answered this question
4 respondents skipped this question
D.11 Question 11
How often do you read Braille?
Answer Options
daily
weekly
every month
less often
Response Response
Percent
Count
88.3%
91
8.7%
9
1.9%
2
1.0%
1
103 respondents answered this question
12
© RNIB 2011
4 respondents skipped this question
D.12 Question 12
What types of material do you read in Braille?
Answer Options
labels and lists
leisure books such as novels
factual books such as cooking,
gardening or travel
newspapers
magazines
private correspondence (letters,
bills etc)
work related documents
study materials
personal notes
technical Braille codes (science,
maths, computing)
foreign language Braille codes
Other (please specify)
Response Response
Percent
Count
73.8%
76
64.1%
66
62.1%
64
5.8%
99.0%
6
102
75.7%
78
17.5%
21.4%
63.1%
18
22
65
24.3%
25
20.4%
32.0%
21
33
103 respondents answered this question
4 respondents skipped this question
D.13 Question 13
Do you have any questions about UEB which you think
should be answered in the FAQs?
Participants had many suggestions for subjects which should be
included in a Frequently asked questions list. For a full list of
suggestions, please refer to appendix one. In summary the topics
are as follows
 The history of UEB - when was it formed and what was the idea
behind it?
 What are the reasons for change and what are the main
differences?
 Why can't we just change the technical code?
 Why can't we have UEB without the capital letters?
 Will UEB be more expensive, will it mean you can produce
more braille?
13
© RNIB 2011
 Why has it been necessary to design UEB in a way that makes
it much more bulky eg. dropping some contractions and
increasing the number of cells used for punctuation?
 What kind of training will be available in UEB and what
reference materials will be produced?
 Clarity on who the change is for. Some braille users feel that the
change is for the benefit of transcribers/teachers/software
manufacturers etc to the detriment of the general user.
 Clarity on whether UEB will replace SEB or whether they will
run along side each other and what this means for legacy
material.
 What is the plan for consideration of UEB, what is the process
and what are the timescales?
70 respondents answered this question
37 respondents skipped this question
D.14 Question 14
Do you have anything else you would like to say about UEB?
Nearly 90% of participants took the opportunity to answer this
question. The full list of feedback is contained in appendix 2 of this
report. There were comments both in support of the code and
against it. .A summary of the key themes are as follows: There was a range of comments in support of UEB. Most
commented on the fact that they found it easier than they
thought it was going to be and that the differences were not
significant. They felt a unified system made sense and
recognised the benefits for users of the future.
 Those who did not like UEB were very happy with the current
code, couldn't see the benefits of changing it and a number did
not want to have to learn anything new at this late stage in life.
Those who disliked UEB had specific objections.
 By far the greatest number of comments were received on
the increased space taken by UEB. This would mean more
braille to carry around, more shelving space required, more
paper, more expense and would be detrimental to the
environment.
 Participants felt that the increased number of cells taken by
UEB would also have a negative impact on the speed of
reading.
 They felt that the introduction of capitals was unnecessary
and also a waste of space.
14
© RNIB 2011





 They made specific observations on coding. Some symbols
were confusing and again the increased space taken by
punctuation was a negative aspect of the code.
 They were concerned that UEB would be more expensive to
produce,
People again pointed out the different types of user and how
UEB might impact on them in different ways. New learners
would find it easier but people currently learning would find it a
demotivating. Producers would like UEB but current users
(particularly older people) would not
Some people felt it might improve people's spelling
There was confusion as to how the code might be implemented
and whether it would run alongside SEB and if it didn't how
would new users access all the stocks of SEB braille that we
have in the library etc.
People suggested courses and reference sheets for learning
the new code, maybe running magazines in UEB and SEB
alongside for a few editions.
In terms of a decision on adoption one person said we needed
a lot more discussion and didn't want to be 'railroaded' another
urged us to wait on a decision by the USA and another would
appreciate a definitive decision and early implementation
95 respondents answered this question
12 respondents skipped this question
E. Conclusion
In conclusion, this piece of research set out to establish a
representative view of a sample of braille users on reading UEB.
The sample group did not receive any prior instruction and only a
very basic summary of the aims of UEB and the code changes in
literary braille. 73% of the sample group had previously heard of
UEB and 27% hadn't. 40% could read the braille without any
difficulty and 49.5% could read the braille but more slowly than
usual. The most common problem identified was the removal of
the 9 contractions, followed by changes in punctuation coding and
then the removal of sequencing.
Braille readers took the opportunity to suggest a range of subjects
which should be included in a Frequently Asked Questions List.
These questions formed the basis of the FAQ document which is
now available from UKAAF. Nearly 90% of respondents went on
to talk more specifically about their views on UEB. There was a
15
© RNIB 2011
range of comments from people both in support of UEB and from
those very happy with the current code, who didn't see the need to
change. The main objection to UEB was the increased space that
it took. There were many other valuable observations which were
all included in the report presented to the UKAAF board at the end
of October 2011. The report was to assist the members in their
decision as to whether to adopt UEB within the UK.
16
© RNIB 2011
Appendix 1 - Full list of comments in
answer to question 13
Do you have any questions about UEB which you think
should be answered in the FAQs?
a) The History of UEB
 When was UEB formed and what is the idea behind it?
b) Issues around Increased size of documents in UEB
 Why is UEB designed in a way that makes it more bulky?
 Do you not think that this will be detrimental to the
environment? It takes up so much more space and it is
expensive to produce and why, I thought, that RNIB were trying
to change everyone over to audio.
 What about working people who carry books and documents
around for their work? UEB is going to double their load.
 Why, in these days of trying to save the environment, are you
introducing something that will use more paper?
 Why do contractions take up more space?
 Why are contractions being removed when they reduce space
and UEB is longer? Can UEB be translated from Chinese
characters?
 Why waste space?
 In the present climate where we are trying to improve on our
carbon footprint how can you justify the change when it is going
to take more space and more volumes? This would mean more
trees needed, more transport and more shelving space.
 For good Braille users would you want the Braille extended by
omission of certain signs like the "ally"?
 Does it use up more space than the Standard English Braille?
c) Training and Reference Manuals
 Will there be any form of training to learn UEB? Will there be a
leaflet outlining the changes?
 Will there be some kind of reference book so that we can look
up things that we haven't come across before?
 Will there be a booklet, similar to Footprints, to explain simply
the differences? I think we need a reference book to refer to.
17
© RNIB 2011
 Will there be an up to date reference tutor where you can look
up new signs?
 Is there going to be a key for the suggested differences.
 Where could I find listings of new codes?
d) The proposed audience for UEB
 Who is it envisaged the UEB would be aimed at?
 If UEB is adopted will this be right across the board?
 Do you not think that this is possibly making it easier for the
Braille producers but not taking into account the views of Braille
users?
 Would the use of UEB encourage non Braille users to learn
Braille?
e) UEB/SEB or both
 Is there a plan to replace Standard English Braille or will it be an
extra? Why bother?
 I have slight learning problems, would standard Braille still be
available?
 Do you not think that having two different codes will be
confusing for new learners? I am a Braille teacher and if, for
example, they learn the word "able" as an "a" and then the
contraction for ble and then they come across it as wholly spelt
out it will be confusing?
 Would medicines and prescriptions be labelled in UEB?
f) Consultation and timescale
 Is this definitely going ahead or do we Braille users have any
say in it?
 Is it going to be introduced or do we have a say in it?
 If RNIB are planning to change how soon are they intending to
implement it?
g) Legacy Material
 If children are learning UEB how will they access old stock?
Will they have to learn both UEB and Standard English Braille?
 Experienced Braille reader’s, would not have a problem, but
what would happen to original book collections?
 What is going to happen to existing stock? There seem to be
people who are so determined to get this changed. Why?
18
© RNIB 2011
 If children start learning UEB what happens to all the books?
Why mess around with something that's worked for such a long
time?
 If it works why change it? What will happen to existing stock?
Won't it be confusing for people who learn UEB if they come
across books in Standard English Braille?
h) Rationale for the change
 I understand the need for change with technical Braille but why
change the rest?
 What are the key advantages of UEB?
 What are the main differences?
 Why reduce the contractions?
i) Changing just the technical code
 Could we not leave Braille alone and just change it for technical
Braille?
 Why can't Standard English Braille be left alone for every day
Braille and UEB introduced just where it is practical, for
example, for technical Braille?
j) Cost and availability
 Will it be more expensive to produce?
 If this is implemented and Braille was easier to produce will
more literature be published in Braille?
k) Capital letters
 Why have you introduced capital letters?
 Why do they need to use so many capitals and spacing?
19
© RNIB 2011
Appendix 2 - Full list of comments in
answer to question 14
Do you have anything else you would like to say about UEB?
a) General comments about UEB implementation - positive
 I was worried that I might have to learn a new Braille code but
now realise I would not find it difficult.
 As a long term Braille user I found the UEB fairly easy to adapt
to. (X4)
 If someone was learning Braille from scratch I think it could be
easier. (X2)
 I got on all right with the UEB but not sure if it would be very
useful.
 I did not find the UEB Braille very different from standard Braille.
 I think anything that makes Braille more available and
accessible is a good thing.
 I do think we need to move forward and I think that UEB will
make it easier to learn Braille.
 I actually got on with it better than I thought I would and it has
encouraged me to read more Braille than I have been recently.
 I think it’s about time, there are so many different Braille codes
out there it would be nice to have just the one Braille code for
users, especially if you are a new Braille user.
 I believe it's the future and if young people will find it easier then
we must go with it. I didn't have any real problems reading it.
 I feel very positive about UEB.
 I found the UEB very comfortable to read.
 I am in favour of UEB
 I think it makes more sense to have a unified system and you
soon get used to it.
 I have pen friends in other countries that already use it so I am
used to it and I haven't encountered any problems.
 I was pleasantly surprised by it and think that it does have a
certain logic to it. I didn't really encounter any problems.
 It would be a good idea if everyone used the same
b) General comments about UEB implementation - negative
 I don’t think Braille needs any changes. (X2)
20
© RNIB 2011
 I am strongly against the changes in capitals and contractions
 I found the UEB rather cumbersome and not very enjoyable to
read
 I feel very strongly that Braille is something I've grown up with. It
is my first language and I feel emotionally attached to it. I think it
is a real shame if I can't have the books I want in the Braille I've
grown up with in my own country. I also feel that writing my
journal in Braille makes it more personal and I like the choice
and the opportunity to use Braille. I use Standard English Braille
to check my spellings and UEB feels like a 2nd language. It
doesn't feel like my own. Would people be prepared to start
spelling like Americans? I also do not like the way it's been
brought to us. I could have missed it if the TO hadn't explained
it to me. The anthology should have had a covering letter with it
.I want Braille treated as the function it is. It is my normal way of
doing normal stuff. Language evolves and Braille should not be
changed by the powers that be. It is a form of language
expression and it should be treated with respect. If UEB is
introduced it should be introduced very gently.
 Mr X is blind and deaf and said he prefers the standard Braille
system.
 I am not really interested in UEB
 I do not see the need to change from the Braille that we use at
the moment to UEB. Perhaps it’s my generation, I'm 83 and I
know a lot of people my age that do not like the UEB either.
 I really cannot see how it is going to make it easier to learn.
Standard English Braille is logical and it seems as if UEB is
taking away that logic. I don't understand why double letters
have had to change. There seem to be people who are
determined to get this changed and I don't understand why.
 I would not want to change to UEB at this stage in life.
 I found the UEB very difficult to read and am not keen on the
changes.
 It seemed to me that it was a step backwards to Grade 1 Braille
rather than Grade 2 as some of the words and phrases were
not contracted
 I wouldn't want to re-learn anything at my age now and I don't
really like changes.
 I found the whole thing more irksome than difficult.
 I don't like the capital letters; I don't like the loss of contractions
or the congestion of signs. I was happy as it was I think new
21
© RNIB 2011
Braille users would find it harder to use and it’s more
cumbersome the way it’s printed. I personally do not like it.
 I didn't come across any problems but I do think if something
works why change it?
 It's rubbish - get rid of it. I am not willing to try it and am quite
happy with what I learnt at school
c) User Feedback
 I would hope that the comments and responses of Braille users
are acted upon.
d) Reference and Training Material
 Firstly we would need a training/information sheet with a table
on the left stating the Standard English Braille and then a
column on the right giving the UEB alternative.
 I think there should be courses for us wrinklies to help us get
used to it gradually. Maybe a magazine to run alongside other
RNIB magazines which explains the differences
 I think it would have helped if we had been given some
instructions to tell us what the signs were as we went along. I
couldn't make out the name of the first contributor.
e) Speed of Reading
 I found the UEB Braille slowed me down and cannot see any
advantages with it. I don’t like it!
 I do think that it is slower to read because you cannot get so
many words on each line and for people like me who have
arthritis in the shoulders this makes it more difficult to read for
long.
 It feels like we are taking a step backwards. This is more bulky
and it takes longer to read. A lot of symbols and words have
doubled in size e.g. ally is now 4 cells instead of 2.
f) Increased space taken by UEB
 I feel that UEB is going backwards. It is like converting back to
Grade 1 Braille. It takes up so much space and I think Braille
should be as compact as possible. (X3)
 I think capital letters and commas which take more space make
UEB more bulky. I wasn't expected to put capital letters in when
I was at school.
 I think that Braille should be as compact as possible but the
UEB is using huge amounts of extra cells. (X2)
22
© RNIB 2011
 I don't accept that it will make it easier to learn as it is more
bulky and therefore it takes longer to read. I think it will be so
bulky. ally, for example, takes 4 cells instead of 2. Braille is
bulky enough already.
 I know you have to learn to change, but some of the changes
suggested in UEB I do not see the reason for. You have
reduced the spacing but now the new bracket signs take up
more space than the old lower case g which was used
previously. I would rather stay with the old style Braille as it’s
more compact than the UEB. The reading material excluding
the punctuation is no different really to the old Braille. I've been
reading Braille for over 60 years, I didn't find the old Braille
difficult and I thought that you had reached the maximum
amount of punctuations and abbreviations. I don't see why it’s
necessary to change it.
 It will obviously be more bulky and Braille books are bulky
enough already.
 I am a language teacher and carry a lot of books and
documents around as it is and if I had to carry them around in
UEB it would be very difficult for me. I work in a school that has
a VI unit and the class knew nothing about UEB.
 I think it will take more space and be more costly. The word
"able" for example takes up 2 spaces in Standard English
Braille but 4 spaces in UEB. Surely this is more costly and more
expensive to produce.
 I am just concerned about the space it will take up. It will
obviously take more paper to produce and therefore be more
expensive and be detrimental to the environment.
 I feel UEB makes Braille longer and am not sure there is a need
to change it.
 I feel that UEB is longer [more paper] and Braille should be left
as it is.
 The benefits outweigh the extra bulk. It's a shame we have lost
the sequencing but I understand why.
 I think it will take up much more space and I think it is totally
unnecessary to put certain words out in full. If changes like
symbols etc. were made to print there would be an outcry.
 I thought that the country was trying to save the planet but with
this new UEB it will take up more space as a lot of the
contractions have gone and the spacing is different. It will mean
more trees needed, more transport costs and more shelving
space.
23
© RNIB 2011
 I don't think it will encourage people to use it and I think the way
that words are spelt out rather than using contractions makes it
a lot more bulky. Surely it would be better to make it less bulky?
 UEB takes up more space on the paper than what we are used
to. I understand the point of making just one Braille that is easy
for everyone to use but I don't think that’s the case.
 I don't like the idea of extending Braille. Braille should be more
concise and not extended. It shouldn't be made more wordy. It
should be made shorter to read.
 I have never found any ambiguities of meaning because once
you've learnt the rules you've learnt it. However, I am not keen
on UEB because it is clumsy and it will be more bulky than it is
already. I particularly dislike the oblique "/" as it uses 2 cells
which is unnecessary and the brackets are dreadful.
g) SEB/UEB or both
 Would Standard English Braille be phased out?
 I feel that as a Braille teacher it is difficult enough to explain the
rules of Standard English Braille but if you add UEB new
learners will not know what is right for which kind of Braille.
 The UEB took up more space, am an avid reader so persevered
with it but would not want to use it all the time.
 I am in favour of UEB for the intercontinental use but not sure
about it for my own personal every day use. I am all for moving
forward and didn't really have any problems with it but to be
able to write it myself and have to re-learn it at my age I
wouldn't want to do .If you are sighted you would read different
font and different people's handwriting so why not different
Braille?
 I can foresee it being very confusing if old stock was kept in
Standard English Braille and new stock is in UEB. If you have
only learnt UEB it would be difficult.
h) Consultation and timescales
 I feel the survey was well conducted and captured the interest
of Braille users by sending the document in advance.
 A definitive decision and early implementation would be
appreciated by Braille users.
 We should wait until we find out what the USA is doing before
we adopt it.
24
© RNIB 2011
 It feels like they are saying "if we push for long enough they will
eventually agree to it". It is far too long winded and
cumbersome.
 I think there needs to be a lot more discussion before UEB is
brought into this country because SEB users will rise up in
revolt. I feel that it has been smuggled in through the back door
and that we have been rail-roaded into this. I can see the
validity of technical Braille but I am worried that if it is pushed
into this country Braille users may give up on Braille which
would be a terrible shame
i) Capital Letters
 I am all for capital letters as I have been campaigning for them
for years.
 I also don't like the capital letters that you use in it. Please don't
change it.
 If RNIB used the old grade 1 and grade 2 systems we would
save a lot of paper. I feel that the capital letters used in UEB
take up too much space which is a waste of paper in these
economic times.
 I do not see the need for capital letters.
 I am grateful to have any Braille and if it means that we have to
put up with UEB then so be it. Having said that, I do believe
capitals are unnecessary and a great waste of space.
 I feel that the capitalisation is totally unnecessary. It takes up far
too much space and makes the document longer to read.
 The introduction of capital letters has not helped me understand
where they should go.
 I do not understand why UEB insists on using capital letters as
it takes up too much space. I think Braille should be as compact
as possible in order to read quicker. I understand the use of
capitals for teaching but they are very unnecessary.
 I personally don't see the point of introducing the capitals, it’s
hard to get used to reading them.
 When I learnt Braille as a child I never knew about capital
letters so why the need now
j) Specific Coding and layout observations
 I also think that the excessive use of italics before every
heading is completely unnecessary. There seems to be a
computer programme which transcribes print to Braille which is
absolutely full of italics.
25
© RNIB 2011
 The capital A sign can be confused with the ST sign.
 Some of the new codes might not be very helpful.
 The extra dots used were cumbersome and unnecessary.
There was something new for italics which I found hard to figure
out which was also cumbersome, as there were so many dots
before you got to the word.
 The presentation of the document was good and I liked the full
words instead of contractions.
 Don't just put one word at the end of the line instead of a middle
space between and at the end of paragraphs sometimes there’s
just one word on its own. You don't need to put all these spaces
as it just makes it more cumbersome to read.
 I found that the lines were closer together than normal Braille.
 I don't understand why it needs to be changed as really there
are relatively few changes. I found the brackets very confusing
and had to go back over the title of the essay, the author, which
country they came from and their age, all of which were in
brackets. I don't understand why they have stopped using
certain abbreviations e.g. .6Y for ally and .6N for ition. If you
need to do it so that print can be turned to Braille on a computer
why can't the computer be programmed for Standard English
Braille??
 I think that the opening bracket looks like a number 2 in
computer Braille. Also the 4,5,6 in front of the oblique stroke
means nothing but think this might be because of conflict
between the oblique stroke and the ST.
k) The proposed audience for UEB
 Myself and many friends are not entirely comfortable with the
idea of UEB, it seems geared to transcribing and not Braille
users.
 Some of the children had just passed their Braille exam and
they didn't want to have to learn a new code and they already
have trouble accessing the curriculum so to have to learn a new
code would be a nightmare.
 I feel that UEB would be easier for younger people to learn
 It may be very difficult for some older people to learn when they
have used Braille for many years.
26
© RNIB 2011
l) General Observations on the braille code
 I also think that basic Braille should be taught to all blind,
partially sighted and sighted children because you never know
what's going to happen to you.
 I do value Braille .It is such a good learning format.
 I would like to read more publications in Braille.
m) Spelling
 I also think that Braille keeps your spelling in check and to be
read to by a computer or by a talking book means that you don't
actually see the written word.
 I think this new UEB might improve people's spelling but I was
confused by the .6 capitals which I think could be confused with
a letter and the "able" could be confused with a number sign.
n) Affordability.
I'm concerned that it will be more expensive to produce and for
those of us who aren't working and are on a tight budget it will
become something that we cannot afford.
27