[bksvol-discuss] Re: The Broker--strengths and weaknesses
- From: "Pratik Patel" <pratikp1@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 11:05:46 -0500
Peter,
If you can, You can leave the PDF in the "incoming" directory at
ftp://ftp.consultabilitygroup.com. If you have trouble, please let me know.
Pratik
Pratik Patel
Interim Director
Office of Special Services
Queens College
Director
CUNY Assistive 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 Peter Scialli
Sent: Monday, January 17, 2005 10:59 AM
To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: The Broker--strengths and weaknesses
Pratik,
The PDF is 14 megs. I don't think I can send that by Email. Do youhave
another suggestion?
________________________
Peter M. Scialli, Ph.D.
Associate, Technical Projects, Bookshare.org
www.bookshare.org
A Project of The Benetech Initiative - Technology Serving Humanity
peter @benetech.org
www.benetech.org
----- Original Message -----
From: "Pratik Patel" <pratikp1@xxxxxxxxx>
To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, January 17, 2005 10:43 AM
Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: The Broker--strengths and weaknesses
> You can send it to me as well. I'l put it through its usual paces and
> promise to clcean it up before submitting.
>
> Pratik
>
>
>
>
> Pratik Patel
> Interim Director
> Office of Special Services
> Queens College
> Director
> CUNY Assistive 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 Pratik Patel
> Sent: Monday, January 17, 2005 10:31 AM
> To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: The Broker--strengths and weaknesses
>
> Peter,
>
> If you'd like to post the PDF, I'l put it through both Finereader and
> Omnipage. Both do an excellent job with PDF's than either K1K or OB.
>
> Pratik
>
>
>
>
> Pratik Patel
> Interim Director
> Office of Special Services
> Queens College
> Director
> CUNY Assistive 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 Peter Scialli
> Sent: Monday, January 17, 2005 10:12 AM
> To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: The Broker--strengths and weaknesses
>
> I actually have the original scan as a PDF. If someone is interested, I
> can send it to them or convert it to KES, ARK or whatever where it can be
> reprocessed by hand. I'd be happy to get it posted to the site in a less
> rushed, more navigationally correct version.
>
>
> ________________________
> Peter M. Scialli, Ph.D.
> Associate, Technical Projects, Bookshare.org
> www.bookshare.org
>
> A Project of The Benetech Initiative - Technology Serving Humanity
> peter @benetech.org
> www.benetech.org
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mike Pietruk" <pietruk@xxxxxxxxx>
> To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Monday, January 17, 2005 9:54 AM
> Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: The Broker--strengths and weaknesses
>
>
>> Guido
>>
>> I think we here have as much a philosophical question as a technical one.
>> As no matter what system is implemented or put in place, both on
>> BookShare
>> and within our ocr software, someone will find it not to their liking.
>> On the one hand, having page numbers, sections, chapters, etc kept in the
>> text is invaluable.
>> But then when too much of that info is announced, others object.
>> My personal preference is to have more rather than less kept; and hence,
>> a
>> lenient stripper;
>> but I alredy understand the objections especially among those who do
>> automated continuous reading, convert to mp3 and all the rest.
>>
>> "The Broker" should be a case study in showing just how difficult all
>> this
>> can be especially when dealing with automated tools and rush scanning
>> without hand validating.
>> Unintentionally, and this could in no way have been prevented other than
>> through painstaking effort which would have delayed availability of the
>> book, valuable info was lost.
>> In the short-run, having the book immediately available is more important
>> than having technical glitches dealt with.
>> Perhaps the best solution, in a case such as this, is to have the book
>> immediately made available with the originally scanned copy placed on the
>> step 1 validation page for someone, if they chose, to do the manual
>> finetuning.
>> Then, once validated, the improved copy would replace the original one.
>> That would be the best of both worlds -- quick access but also addressing
>> the real concerns expressed by Ken that the book isn''t optimally labeled
>> internally.
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Other related posts:
