8.1. The Basics.
8.2. The Logistics.
8.3. Types of Braille.
8.4. Paper Type and Size, and Formatting Preference.
8.5. Things To Remember About Certain Document Types.
8.6. Forms and Surveys.
8.7. Signs, Maps, and Buttons.
8.1. The Basics.
8.1A. What is Braille?
8.1B. Braille Rights.
8.1C. Promotion of Braille as an Option.
8.1A. What is Braille?
Braille is a reading method where the reader usually uses their index fingertips to read a system of raised dots on a paper page or alternative such as plastic overlay etc.
8.1B. Braille Rights.
8.1B1. Braille Rights – the basics.
8.1B2. Braille Plus (Braille+).
8.1B1. Braille Rights – the basics.
Any visually impaired person has the legal right, on request, to have any or all communications from a statutory body sent to them in braille.
It is important to remember that while a braille-reader may have some reading skills through screenreading software on a computer or smartphone, etc., and so may be able, at least to some extent, to be able to read screenreader accessible files, this should never be seen as a replacement for braille where braille is the stated preference of the service-user. In other words, if a service-user states that braille is their general preference in communications, or that they would like a particular document in braille, do not send them anything else instead, or in the meantime, unless they have explicitly requested that other format, also (see 8.2B2, below).
The reason for this is that listening to information using a screenreader is a totally different way of processing information than reading information through braille. Information accessed through screenreading technology is processed through the audio nerves, and information obtained through the reading of braille is processed through the visual cortex. In this way, the difference between reading braille and listening to a screenreader is like the difference between reading a letter and having it read out to you.
8.1B2. Braille Plus (Braille+).
Often, there are situations where the braille-reader would also like or need a document to be shown to a third party, such as another public body, a contractor, or a solicitor etc. In such circumstances, the braille-reader may request that a copy of the brailled document also be provided in a format accessible to a sighted person (such as ink on paper or an attached document in an email.
Note, however, that sending of non-brailled documents should never be sent in lieu of brailled transcripts, including in advance of brailled transcripts. Where non-braille documents are sent in addition to the brailled transcript, they should arrive, in so far as is practicable, at the same time.
8.1C. Promotion of Braille as an Option.
All statutory bodies, at all appropriate points, should publicise the fact the option of braille communication is available on request.
8.2. Logistics.
8.2A. Sourcing Braille Transcription.
8.2B. Turnaround Time.
8.2C. Internal Systems and Troubleshooting.
8.2A. Sourcing Braille Transcription.
8.2A1. In-house Braille Transcription Facilities.
8.2A2. Specialist Braille Transcription Service-Providers.
8.2A1. In-house Braille Transcription Facilities.
Some statutory bodies have their own in-house braille transcription facilities, while most currently use external service-providers for this purpose.
Where a statutory body opts to set up its own in-house brailling facilities, by acquiring a braille embosser and braille transcription software, it is imperative that adequate training is provided from the outset so that there is someone always available to provide the brailling service – regardless of who is on leave or who has changed job, etc.
Also, where a statutory body has its own in-house brailling facility, all other departments in that organisation need to be aware of this facility, and suggest braille as an option to visually impaired people.
8.2A2. Specialist Braille Transcription Service-Providers.
In the Republic of Ireland, there are three main service-providers of braille-transcription, namely: National Council for the Blind of Ireland (NCBI), Arbour Hill, and Child Vision (educational). Since 2013, these service-providers have chosen only to provide for Unified English Braille (UEB), and refused to provide Standard English Braille (SEB, also known as non-UEB) transcriptions – see 5.3, below.
However, in October, 2022, after talks with VVI, NCBI has changed its policy, so that it will now provide SEB transcriptions on request (as reasonable accommodation). Otherwise, where SEB is sought, currently, a public body, without its own inhouse brailling system, must have recourse to Visual Access (in Belfast), or the Royal National Institute for the Blind (RNIB), based in Britain.
8.2B. Turnaround Time.
It is sometimes stated that braille can take a long time to produce. Where this does happen, it is generally because the transcription service-provider has a backlog of other customers.
A braille transcript itself can be produced relatively quickly – about 10-15 minutes longer than producing a print document. The additional time results from the electronic document having to be edited in the braille transcription software, as the page sizes and number of characters per page differ between braille and print.
Otherwise, generally, the greatest time obstacle for delivery of braille is the delay due to documents being sent in the post. Documents using “Free Post for the Blind” have been known to have taken up to two weeks to have been delivered from one address to another.
If, for any reason, braille documents are delivered late to the service-user, reasonable accommodation must be made so that the service-user is in no way disadvantaged in relation to their sighted comparitor, as a result of the delayed communication.
8.2C. Internal Systems and Troubleshooting.
8.2C1. Costings and Accounts.
8.2C2. Routing of Brailled Documents.
8.2C1. Costings and Accounts.
Braillist service-users sometimes encounter delays in receiving braille documents because the costing of the brailling must first be sent to the public body’s accounts department for approval. Such a basic Human Right as being communicated with through braille should not be subject to any bureaucratic obstacles, and all public bodies should have systems in place which make sure this does not happen. Since such delays are only experienced in a tiny minority of public bodies, it is clear that the most efficient and Human-Rights-friendly way is the norm, but there should be no exceptions to this norm.
8.2C2. Routing of Brailled Documents.
Problems often occur where the visually impaired citizen has not received the communication (at all, or in time), from the braille transcription service provider; and where the citizen is dealing with a generic “customer service” etc., the citizen, often finds that they are the ones blamed for the breakdown in communications – e.g., that they missed their appointment because they themselves were responsible, since they did not contact the braille transcription service-provider.
For this reason, where a braille-reading service-user has been identified by a public body, there needs to be a designated specialised contact within the public body so that such breakdowns in communications can be rectified to the satisfaction of the braille-reading service-user in a speedy manner.
In most situations, it is a faster turnaround for the brailled letter to be sent directly to the service-user, themselves; and this is the general default preference as long as Section 2.2 of this policy document is being adhered to (i.e., prioritisation of end-user-preference).
Where direct means of braille communication are failing (due to a combination of failures of the braille transcription service-provider and lack of understanding on the part of the generic customer interface of the public body, the service-user should be asked if they would prefer the transcribed braille communication to go to themselves, directly, or whether they would prefer it to go to them via the main or specifically relevant contact point in the public body that they were already dealing with (e.g., the Consultant’s office in a medical setting, or an Executive Head Officer etc., in a general Civil Service setting).
8.3. Types of Braille.
8.3A. SEB vs. UEB.
8.3B. Right to Choose.
8.3C. Availability of SEB.
8.3A. SEB vs. UEB.
All people who learnt to read braille in Ireland before 2013 learned Standard English Braille (SEB), also known as non-UEB. This type of braille has an Irish language equivalent, Standard Irish Braille (SIB).
In 2013, service-providers (through the Irish National Braille and Alternative Formats Association (INBAF)), unilaterally switched to Unified English Braille (UEB), so that all formal teaching of braille in Ireland since 2013 has been of Unified English Braille (UEB), and sometimes also, its Irish language equivalent (Unified Irish Braille (UIB)).
Both SEB/SIB and UEB/UIB codes have a basic version (Grade 1), and a more complex version (which is quicker to read, but requires knowledge of many shortcuts known as ‘contractions’.
While there are some differences in Grade 2 contractions between SEB and UEB, the main difference is that, in both Grades 1 and 2, the newer code uses an extra cell, containing a ‘dot 6’, to indicate a capitalised letter; whereas the older code does not, by default, indicate the existence of capitalisation.
8.3B. Right To Choose.
If there was little difference between the two codes, there would not have been any argument for replacing SEB with UEB in the first place. While both codes are based on the same original braille alphabet, the punctuation changes – and in particular capitalisation – can be quite disorienting to those who prefer SEB.
As a result, People who are used to SEB may find it difficult to read Grade 1 or 2 of UEB, and those who prefer UEB may not be familiar with some SEB contractions if they are reading Grade 2 SEB.
In short, SEB is far less cluttered, and has been the standard for many years. Therefore, many people find SEB preferable and, by default, easier to read. As such, as reasonable accommodation, all people who request braille must have the choice between SEB/SIB and UEB/UIB.
The preference is decided by the end-user and not the braille service-provider, no matter what the latter may tell you. SEB and UEB braille can easily be produced by changing the setting in the braille transcription software. It is a matter of simply checking and unchecking a box.
It should be noted that SEB vs. UEB is a matter of reasonable accommodation and end-user choice, and not necessarily endorsement of either code by those supporting the right to choose.
8.3C. Availability of SEB.
It is claimed by some that SEB is not available in the Republic of Ireland (cf. Participation Matters, National Disability Authority (2022, p.34). However, this is incorrect in two respects. Firstly, the NCBI, at least, is a major braille transcription service-provider that does, now, provide SEB versions of documents on request. Secondly, some public institutions, with their in-house braille-production, also produce SEB on request (e.g., Dublin City Council, Bank of Ireland, etc.).
Secondly, if a braille transcription service provider refuses to provide documents in SEB, if requested, the public body should insist that SEB be produced – since the tail should not be wagging the dog; and the public authority, if possible, should cite breech of contract where relevant.
8.4. Paper type and size, and formatting preferences
Specialised braille paper should be used for reasons of thickness and surface smoothness. For example, if the surface is too smooth, it is more difficult to read the braille.
To be on the safe side, we recommend that the default be braille on one side of a page only. This is because when the braille paper is not very heavy, the braille comes through on both sides and can be difficult to read comfortably.
The recommended default paper size is around 9.25 inches by 12 inches, or 23.5cm x 30.5cm, which may include tractor feed. That is an approximate as there are different sizes. Essentially without tractor feed it is approximately the same width as A-4 but slightly longer. The primary advantage of this size is that, unlike the larger (12 inches by 12 inches, 30cm by 30cm), it is much easier to store and can be filed in standard folders. In other words, whereas the A4 type is ready-made for filing etc, the larger size is not.
Generally speaking, the formatting of a document so that it is suitable for braille-reading, is done by the braille transcription software, and not by someone altering it in Word etc. beforehand.
The braille-reading service-user should find that:
- The brailled text should only ever be left indented – not centred, right indented, or justified.
- Single-line spacing is the recommended default preference.
- Indented Paragraphs should be indicated by two single spaces (i.e., unlike the print equivalent).
However, as with everything else, the preferences of an individual service-user are paramount, and these should be ascertained as a matter of protocol. Clearly, when the preferences of the service-user deviate from the default templates on the transcription software, they must be reasonably accommodated.
8.5. Things To Remember About Certain Document Types.
8.5A. Letters.
8.5B. Preformatted Documents.
8.5A. Letters.
where letters are sent to be transcribed into braille, it should be remembered to keep the address of the sender at the top of the letter. Too often, statutory bodies just send the letter-text by email to the braille transcription service, forgetting that it needs to be treated like a letter. The recipient may then have no idea from where the letter has originated.
This problem all-too-frequently occurs because by default, the digital form of the letter doesn’t have an address because it is put onto headed paper (which has the address on it), only when it is put into print. This headed-paper process does not happen when putting a letter into braille, so this needs to be compensated for by putting the addresses in the original letter file, or making sure that it is added before being turned into braille.
8.5B. Preformatted Documents.
Sometimes, templates are used, pro forma, which are designed to make things easier to navigate for the sighted reader, but which usually do not facilitate easy or adequate navigation by a braille-reader. Examples of this include documents with tables, such as bank statements or presentations of statistical data; and certain legal documents, such as an ES2 (under the Equal Status Acts, 2000-2015), which are used by public bodies in response to a legal notification by a complainant.
The latter should be formatted according to Screenreader-Accessible File formatting (see 6.3 of this document); and the individual end-user should be consulted as to how they would prefer statistical data or tables to be presented in braille.
8.6. Forms and Surveys.
Generally, forms and surveys cannot be filled in in braille. A braille-reader may request the text of a form or survey in braille so that they can use it in tandem with another method of filling it in, and indeed, they may wish to give the sought information separately in braille, if they have access to a braille machine.
Otherwise, if a form is in accessible Word (see Section 6.3), a user of a braille notetaker may be able to independently fill in a form and return it electronically, by email.
8.7. Signs, Maps, and Buttons.
In all public (as opposed to personal) contexts, Grade 1 SEB should be used. The SEB part is because (unnecessary) capital letters will not clutter or confuse readers who need to find out information as quickly as possible. The Grade 1 part is so that people who do not have English braille as their first braille language will still be able to access the information.