On Thu, 17 Jan 2013 19:48:20 +0100 Stephan Beal <sgb...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> FWIW: if the documents are having to be archived "for legal reasons" > then the OCR versions are essentially only useful for convenience in > searching, and not for legal purposes. that's good information to know On Thu, 17 Jan 2013 19:51:58 +0100 "j. van den hoff" <veedeeh...@googlemail.com> wrote: > just my 2c: > there's also djvu http://djvu.org/ which provides astonishingly good > compression for scanned documents, separation of layers, OCR etc. always good to find new things > otherwise I don't think that a SCM is really the suitable tool for > your intended purpose (which I perceive as maintaining/backing up a > list of versioned binary > files): all SCMs that I know are not really good at handling big > binary data sets (and delta-compression sure will not work that > great...). so the repo will get > real big in no time yep. I've tried this a number of ways with photos, and it just didn't work out. Although I have stored large number of mostly text-based pdf's in scm before for lack of better tool, and it wasn't the end of the world. Someday someone will create a tool to fill in the gap. Sort of a DVCS style metadata logging and control facility to a rsync style technology. Kind of like some of the interpretations of "distributed file system" back in the plan 9 lineage of thought for instance. C. Thomas Stover www.thomasstover.com _______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
