[bksvol-discuss] Re: Requirements for acceptance -- the bottom line
- From: "Gary Petraccaro" <garyp130@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 17:10:38 -0400
In the case I mentioned, unfortunately, wood was a word which wouldn't jump
out and byte you unless you were looking for context. It's the
spellchecker's worst nightmare. To see what I mean, look at the word byte
in the last sentense. <grin>
----- Original Message -----
From: "Pratik Patel" <pratikp1@xxxxxxxxx>
To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, August 16, 2004 2:11 AM
Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: Requirements for acceptance -- the bottom line
> Garry,
>
> Your point is well taken. The corrections list we are considering is, I
> believe, for K1K. I am not certain that Openbook supports such a
function,
> though I wouldn't doubt it. A large number of corrections may work well if
> you choose to ensure that the correction that you enter into the file do
not
> create other problems in the book. And, if the correction is going to
pose
> a problem and create another correction error in the scan, we must ensure
> that another correction is added to the file to allow us to change that.
If
> another correction is not possible, I would advise that we not add the
first
> correction to begin with. And, as I mentioned in one of my previous
> messages, I would recommend that people run the automatic corrections
> feature several times. It is easy to do in K1K. It is located under
> tool/apply corrections. I try to do that with books that I validate. It
> resolves many problems right from the beginning.
>
> Pratik
>
>
>
> Pratik Patel
> Managing Director
> CUNYAssistive Technology Services
> The City University of New York
> ppatel@xxxxxx
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Gary Petraccaro
> Sent: Sunday, August 15, 2004 10:45 PM
> To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: Requirements for acceptance -- the bottom
line
>
> While that's not a bad idea, it's important to remember that different
> systems tend to have--or have tended to have--different groups of errors.
> Also, the larger the corrections list, the worse for weeding unless you
look
> at the types of corrections generated for a selection of the books you do.
> A case in point is the one correction of "wold" to "wood". It might be a
> reasonable correction, but, the one time I saw it used, it turned a real
> word into a real word that wasn't there. I only noticed this with the
> corrections list in front of me, and only because I knew the book in
> question cold. Most other times, I'd have completely overlooked it.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "E." <thoth93@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Sunday, August 15, 2004 7:17 PM
> Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: Requirements for acceptance -- the bottom
line
>
>
> > The thought of the corrections list brings up another point. Would it
be
> > possible to create a sort of master bookshare corrections list which
could
> > be shared among ourselves. it could include your suggestion and others
> > with the proviso that they be pretty bullet proof. Once something makes
> it
> > into a corrections list, it better do what you want it to or it will
> create
> > its own batch of errors.
> > At 07:10 PM 8/15/2004, you wrote:
> >
> > >Elizabeth,
> > >
> > >You will often find that the books that contain die for the, will
contain
> > >many replacements of the letters th with di. I have populated my
> > >automatic corrections list with words that have this combination of
> letters
> > >such as diey for they.
> > >
> > >Pratik
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
Other related posts:
