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

What should be said for × and · in "LiteralSpeak" and character navigation mode? #332

Open
NSoiffer opened this issue Jan 5, 2025 · 5 comments

Comments

@NSoiffer
Copy link
Owner

NSoiffer commented Jan 5, 2025

There are many ways to speak these. Most come with some semantic baggage.

· is probably easiest: perhaps "center dot"

× can be "times", "cross", "cross product", "by". Something like "cross sign" seems too wordy.

There are other symbols that need a literal meaning, but this is a starting point and maybe some convention can be established.

Thoughts?

@NV-Codes
Copy link
Contributor

NV-Codes commented Jan 6, 2025

One disadvantage of "times" for the × symbol is its lack of specificity; listeners could imagine a dot, a star/asterisk, or an X-shaped cross.

Though "times" is how NVDA verbalizes the Unicode symbol.

@NSoiffer
Copy link
Owner Author

NSoiffer commented Jan 7, 2025

FYI: the Unicode name for the symbol is "Multiplication Sign". I don't that is a great choice: it doubt everyone will think of the same symbol and the name is pretty long. But I suspect it is a little less ambiguous than "times".

@andrew-l-d
Copy link
Collaborator

"Multiplication"is very verbose. My maths knowledge is much less than others here, but "times"means multiply to me. Could abbreviate to "mult", but people would need to know what it meant.

Andrew

@NSoiffer
Copy link
Owner Author

I'm currently leaning towards "cross". "cross sign" is less semantic, but rather long. I'm still looking for better ideas...

@NSoiffer
Copy link
Owner Author

Going once, going twice... Is everyone ok with "cross"?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants