[bksvol-discuss] Re: Benetech official ruling on spelling mistakes
- From: "Sarah Van Oosterwijck" <curiousentity@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2005 10:49:37 -0600
Hehehe
If you think r and t can't be confused just go to the web address in my
signature and when you get there look for the scannos link and hit enter
on it. You will see just how many of those mistakes were made by that
particular confusion.
I used to be able to read print, so I know what a lot of letters look
like, too. I just don't know much about unusual fonts. Sometimes you
really have to use your imagination to fathom how things can be
misrecognized in the way they were.
Sarah Van Oosterwijck
http://home.earthlink.net/~netentity
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tony Baechler" <tony@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, March 08, 2005 9:07 PM
Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: Benetech official ruling on spelling
mistakes
> Hi. For the most part, I agree with you completely. I am not going
to ask
> a sighted person to check a book either. If I am in doubt, I will
leave
> the word alone, even though I know it is wrong. One recent example is
> puRhed or some such. It is obviously wrong but I have no idea what it
> could be. I am not going to take a chance on inventing a word and
possibly
> exposing myself and/or bookshare to law suits because the core content
of
> the book was changed. Someone else can get and rescan the printed
book if
> it is a big enough deal. Finally, I'll just add that while I don't
read
> print, I do know that the shapes of letters are different, so t
instead of
> r could not be an OCR error even if it looks like one because the
shape of
> the letter is different. But then, one particularly funny scanning
error
> is "taco" instead of "fate."
>
> At 10:08 AM 3/8/2005 -0600, you wrote:
> >It is much more likely that r and t would be confused by the OCR
> >software than by the publishers. Yes, they do make mistakes, but you
> >should normally be able to guess correctly about errors. The more
> >experience you have in editing the more you learn what is within the
> >relm of possibility for scannos, and what obviously was a mistake in
the
> >book. You know that we can't always make the books we scan perfect,
so
> >we don't have to give up scanning and editing if we are blind and
can't
> >always check the print book. I am not going to waste the time of
sited
> >people asking them to check every little mistake when there is about
a
> >one in a million chance that the mistake is not a scanno. If I
> >accidently change/correct a letter that I am certain was a scanno,
and
> >it really was a mistake in the book, I'll just pretend that my change
> >was a scanno. ;-)
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.7.1 - Release Date: 3/9/2005
>
>
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.7.1 - Release Date: 3/9/2005
Other related posts:
