[bksvol-discuss] Re: An alternative to validating fair quality submissions
- From: Grandma Cindy <popularplace@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2008 02:27:36 -0800 (PST)
Gary,
Were there a lot of proper names in the book that
might have thrown off the ranking? 99.1 seems pretty
high to me, so I don't see why you think that would
have to be rejected?
I do read the books I validate, (except for two in the
past) line for line, word for word, which is how I
find missing words in sentences and scanning errors
that are proper words but not proper in that
particular context. This is to be expected by a
validator, because scanning machines are not perfect.
They are thrown off, I think, by the size of the type
on the page, how close together the words are on the
page, and the quality of the page's paper.
As I said, I don't understand why you think the book
with 99.1 ranking would have had to be rejected.
G.Cindy
--- Gary Petraccaro <garyp130@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I've just had one enlightening experience with a
> book I've already done. I
> found a page missing and rerequested this book on
> library loan. When I got
> it I did the missing page. I couldn't get it above
> 99.1 no matter what I
> did. This must have been a different copy because
> if the whole book had
> been like this, I'd have had to read the whole book,
> line, by line, retyping
> as I went. There's no other way to fix this kind of
> problem and if we
> encounter a book like this where the whole book is
> envolved, that book will
> have to be left behind.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Grandma Cindy" <popularplace@xxxxxxxxx>
> To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2008 10:49 PM
> Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: An alternative to
> validating fair quality
> submissions
>
>
> > No validator would object to validating a book
> like
> > that, Gary. We expect to do some work, and feel
> guilty
> > if there's nothing to do but enjoy the read,
> > especially now that there's equal pay.
> >
> > I read what I validate, and can tell you that even
> > with 99.4 accuracy but will be something for me to
> do,
> > because even the K1000 ranked spelling won't catch
> > homonyms or the number 1 for the capital I or some
> > other things I can't think of at the moment. smile
> >
> > G.Cindy
> >
> > --- Gary Petraccaro <garyp130@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> >> I've tried it both ways and emotionally prefer a
> >> clean scan, but i must say
> >> that there were times when I carried it too far.
> If
> >> I can get pages to
> >> about 99.4 accuracy, there's a good chance that I
> >> will have pages which can
> >> be cleaned up with not too much work--certainly
> no
> >> more work than the time
> >> it would take to optimize a book and probably
> >> somewhat less. I did one
> >> book, optimizing all the way, and it was not an
> >> experience I'd willing
> >> repeat. Btw, I will submit this book as soon as
> I
> >> can read through and,
> >> since it has a few graphs, I will ask someone
> >> sighted to take a look at a
> >> print copy and help out. Not at all a long book,
> >> 250 pages, but a few
> >> graphs.
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: "Mayrie ReNae" <mrenae@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2008 12:39 PM
> >> Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: An alternative to
> >> validating fair quality
> >> submissions
> >>
> >>
> >> > Hi Donna,
> >> >
> >> > I personally, think it is a great idea. I have
> >> been disheartened lately
> >> > at the number of fair and good submissions on
> the
> >> step 1 page awaiting
> >> > validation. Chances are that a rescan of a
> book
> >> raited fair would take
> >> > less time than actually fixing a scan of less
> than
> >> excellent quality.
> >> >
> >> > Peace,
> >> > Mayrie
> >> >
> >> > At 07:22 AM 1/12/2008, you wrote:
> >> >>Hi all.
> >> >>
> >> >>I apologize in advance if this suggestion
> ruffles
> >> feathers, but it is made
> >> >>in the spirit of getting excellent quality
> books
> >> into the collection.
> >> >>
> >> >>I am one of the volunteers who believes that
> >> "validating" a book shouldn't
> >> >>involve rewriting it because the scan is poor.
> >> There are some books which
> >> >>have strange formatting or difficult tables and
> >> charts or other things
> >> >>that typically don't scan well and the only way
> to
> >> get such books into the
> >> >>collection is in fact for a very patient
> validator
> >> to go through the whole
> >> >>book and fix problematic errors that a rescan
> >> won't fix.
> >> >>
> >> >>However, there are a lot of books on the step
> one
> >> download page that are
> >> >>just straightforward text, fiction or
> nonfiction,
> >> that should scan with no
> >> >>problems, but are rated as fair. In my
> opinion,
> >> it is a waste of
> >> >>volunteer time and effort to have a validator
> make
> >> these scans passable.
> >> >>
> >> >>So here's my alternative. If I, or any other
> >> scanner, obtains a copy of a
> >> >>book that is currently awaiting validation and
> >> rated fair, would it be
> >> >>appropriate for us to download the fair copy,
> >> reject it, and then upload a
> >> >>better scan of the same book?
> >> >>
> >> >>Thoughts? Ideas? No rotten tomatoes please!
> >> >>
> >> >>Donna
> >> >
> >> > 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.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > No virus found in this incoming message.
> >> > Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.516 /
> >> Virus Database:
> >> > 269.19.1/1220 - Release Date: 1/11/2008 6:09 PM
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >> 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.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > WISH LIST (called Requested Additions To The
> Bookshare Collection)is
> > available at
> >
>
http://people.delphiforums.com/jamiecalton/Book_Requests.htm
> > http://www.friendsofbookshare.org/
> >
>
http://studentpages.alma.edu/~07jmyate/book_requests.htm
> >
> > www.jbrownell.com for miscellaneous and useful
> threads
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
____________________________________________________________________________________
> > Looking for last minute shopping deals?
> > Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
> >
>
http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping
> > 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.
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > No virus found in this incoming message.
> > Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> > Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.19.1/1220 -
> Release Date: 1/11/2008
> > 6:09 PM
> >
>
> 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.
>
>
WISH LIST (called Requested Additions To The Bookshare Collection)is available
at
http://people.delphiforums.com/jamiecalton/Book_Requests.htm
http://www.friendsofbookshare.org/
http://studentpages.alma.edu/~07jmyate/book_requests.htm
www.jbrownell.com for miscellaneous and useful threads
____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
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:
