While I can certainly understand and, to some degree, agree with, the
observations of those who think that the Brailled edition of the
Handbook would be excessively voluminous, I must also observe that there
are those for whom nothing is so concrete as something on paper under
their fingers.  Some find it much easier to learn and comprehend a
subject if it is presented in Braille, just as some sighted folks do
better with printed material than if they must listen to the same
material.

Braille may be impractical in this case but we should never say never.

73!

Mike Freeman <[log in to unmask]>
Amateur Radio: < K 7 U I J >

----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Paradgm" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Sunday, January 06, 2002 12:29 AM
Subject: Re: brailling arrl handbook


> I have to say, that I agree with all the other comments - a Braille
copy
> would be quite impractical, it would be thousands and thousands of
pages
> and it would take forever finding what you were after.
>
> Text is the way to go. Maybe you should talk to the arrl about that or
> buy the CDROM version and convert from that.
>
> Paul
> VK2HHH
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Blind-Hams For blind ham radio operators
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of McCloskey,
> Anthony
> Sent: Tuesday, 9 April 2002 1:10 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: brailling arrl handbook
>
> Hi all:
> As Mike stated, good schematic descriptions are essentual.  Tactal
> diagrams
> are useful as far as illustrating schematic symbols, but if the
> schematic is
> more than a few coomponents, the tactal diagram becomes less and less
> useful.  As far as training sighted engineers and technicians in how
to
> describe a schematic verbally I have not had a problem.  Once they
have
> seen
> a couple of examples, most people can do a good job.  I usually tell
> them to
> describe the diagram as they would describe it to someone over the
> phone.
> Its just a little different way for sighted folks to think about
> schematics.
> For the handbook, It would probably take a number of people working on
> schematic descriptions for different sections of the book.  Bye the
way,
> I
> think some of the schematic descriptions in the library of congress
> taped
> version of qst are not the best .
>  They leave a lot of things hanging in there descriptions, and if you
> are
> not on your toes, you can get lost real fast.
> Maybe some of us with some technical background could think about
> getting
> some kind of a bimonthly thing started.
> I
> think its needed.
>
> Tony McCloskey, WA3CAO
>
>