E-Defines vs J-Defines

A fellow Official reporter friend and I are wondering if there is an advantage of one over the other. I told her I never J-Define anything. I always E-Define (things I want in my pers dict I D-Define). Once I'm done with say Vol 1 of a tript, I translate Vol 2 and then just apply the globals from Vol 1 to Vol 2. I also do the same thing if in Real-time -- apply the last globals from the previous volume. She couldn't believe I did that. She J-Defines everything and uses that job dictionary for the next volume when translating it. Are we both achieving the same goal or is there an advantage of J-defining instead of E-defining? Thanks!

Hi, Angela!

I think this is a great question, and it really got me thinking this morning.

Since an E-define ("English define") has no steno associated with it, those entries could never be placed into any dictionary.  A J-define ("job define") has associated steno, which means you could later merge those entries into your PD, or you could share the job dictionary with another reporter.  So I guess those are the main advantages.

There are times when there IS no associated steno with a particular word (say, if you typed it in, or if you performed a replace) and you HAVE to use an E-define instead of a J.   So both types of defines have their place in editing, so I'd never want to be limited to one or the other. 

I use Eclipse, and our E-defines are called "trash globals," so I guess that means they're not meant to be saved.  <G>

Deanna     ;-)

 

 

 

 

E-defining only defines the English and doesn't store the steno at all.  So say you E-define any steno with English.  That steno won't be saved with the E-define so you could use it later.  So say you defined WRAT (raw steno) as "Wide Range Achievement Test."  When you apply the global again, CC will look for the raw steno "WRAT" and then replace that with what you globaled.

J-defines (or K-Defines, for that matter) define the steno.  The advantage of using a J-define is that if it's something that you find yourself writing a lot, it's very easy to move that definition over to your pdix.   If you E-defined everything, you would have to input the entry by hand into your personal dictionary.

You're basically achiving the same goal, but IMHO I think J-defining is better and easier for future usage.

ETA:  Should have read the response first.  :-)  Deanna did a great job of answering that question.  Sorry, Deanna!

Wow! There have been times where I've noticed I'm writing something the same way and want it in my pers dict and had to physically insert it in there. Thanks Deanna and Candis for clearing that up for me :)

Angela Little:

There have been times where I've noticed I'm writing something the same way and want it in my pers dict and had to physically insert it in there.

You can simply D-define it to place it into your personal dictionary, regardless of whether it has been previously J-defined.

D-defines, by the way, may be going into an Update Area rather than directly into your personal dictionary, depending on how dictionary options are set.

Angela,

I don't know which software you use, but I have been on Catalyst for a long time.  I had a 10-month trial and in that cae I used the K-Define, which is Case define.  That way, each day that I translated I simply chose the Case dictionary and didn't have to apply defines. 

Ed

 

 

As long as "use update area" is chosen in the translate options, it doesn't matter of D-defines are going into the update area.  They will be used in translation.

Rhonda Hall-Breuwet, RPR:

As long as "use update area" is chosen in the translate options, it doesn't matter of D-defines are going into the update area.  They will be used in translation.

The update area will certainly be used in translation if it is selected (which is the default setting).  The only caveat is that if there are conflicts between the personal dictionary and the update area (same steno defined differently in both PD and update area), the definition in the update area has priority and will trump the PD.