[bksvol-discuss] Re: reward for upgrading software

  • From: "E." <thoth93@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2005 18:55:19 -0400

Of course you are correct. My suggestions all have caviate to recognize these instances of words. I am concerned that folks submit books though where words are split by spaces or run together. These kinds of errors can be corrected with more attention to settings. So can standard letter missrecognitions such as "die" for "the" "rn for m as in "cornputer". and 'spel ling" mistakes such as the above. All thse are the result of settings which are a bit off.

E.


At 06:47 PM 9/17/2005, you wrote:

You still have to evaluate some things on an individuat basis.  If there
are a lot of medical or scientific terms then the percentage will be
very low because those words aren't in the spelling dictionary.  Also,
if an author has deliberately used bad English or invented words
combined words and such, as a part of the way they have chosen to write
their book, then the percentage is going to be low and it isn't right to
make corrections in those situations.  To just discard a book absed on
that percentage isn't a very good idea.  Further evaluation must be done
to check for the reson why the percentage might be lower than 99%.

Charlene

-----Original Message-----
From: bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of E.
Sent: Saturday, September 17, 2005 4:36 AM
To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: reward for upgrading software


Take this as a personal opinion. I think anything below 98% should be poor and 98 to 99 % fair. These are doable percentages with today's software. Anything with 99% and above can be excellent. But, for instance, The Abortion Myth was listed as being "excellent" when submitted. It had a rating of 97.5 and contained 228 single occurances of words which I could not figure out. I got it up to 99.5 by the time I sent it in for the new books page. That last 5% was made up of the 228 individual one-time occurances of words. I did not reject it outright since it is not a light reading piece of fiction. If it were, I would have rejected.

The real issue here which noone is interested in addressing because it
is
personally messy is that many of these poor scans come from repeat
folks.  If bookshare staff does nothing to curb it, we validators are
going
to have to send a stronger message by rejecting books.


At 05:06 AM 9/17/2005, you wrote:

>Elizabeth and others
>
>I want your feedback on something.  Keeping in mind the caveats
>mentioned about ranked spelling, below what threshhold would a book
>become fair and below what number would a so-called fair book become
>poor and hence rejected?
>
>
>  To unsubscribe from this list send a blank Email to
>bksvol-discuss-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>put the word 'unsubscribe' by itself in the subject line.  To get a
>list
>of available commands, put the word 'help' by itself in the subject
line.

 To unsubscribe from this list send a blank Email to
bksvol-discuss-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
put the word 'unsubscribe' by itself in the subject line.  To get a list
of available commands, put the word 'help' by itself in the subject
line.



To unsubscribe from this list send a blank Email to
bksvol-discuss-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
put the word 'unsubscribe' by itself in the subject line. To get a list of available commands, put the word 'help' by itself in the subject line.

To unsubscribe from this list send a blank Email to bksvol-discuss-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx put the word 'unsubscribe' by itself in the subject line. To get a list of available commands, put the word 'help' by itself in the subject line.

Other related posts: