----- Original Message ----- From: "Jed Rothwell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2007 5:07 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Re: Ed/Jed-Mitchell dispute (was Re: Requesting comments to this comment)
> Michel Jullian wrote: > >>But you do change the content's layout, as I was amazed to discover once. > > Yes. It is impossible to preserve the layout from many papers. In the near future image-to-text conversion software will probably be able to preserve exactly the visual aspect, so we will both have Hi Fi (transcription visually indistinguishable from original) and text so we will both be happy (and so will Google Books and Amazon and JSTOR!). In fact I am surprised they aren't able to do that already. In the meantime if you want Hi Fi and if you don't have the original electronic document you need the image file. >>Also this scribe work introduces retranscription errors, I pointed >>one out to you recently. > > That is why I have the authors check the papers before I upload. It doesn't work obviously, if it did I wouldn't have found a transcription error (wrong power of 10 IIRC) in one of the maybe 10 papers I read from your site. > Actually, I usually correct many more mistakes than I make. I mean > spelling mistakes and the like. In a scientific paper, even ten spelling mistakes left uncorrected in a slightly blurred image are better than a single mistake introduced into a critical figure or formula in a very clean text pdf file IMHO. Maybe you could offer BOTH formats? Just my two cents. Michel ... > But as long as you are sitting out there in the > peanut gallery benefiting from LENR-CANR without doing any work or > contributing so much as $20, I do not see why I need to listen to > either of you. why should one listen to users indeed? :) Seriously, I am really grateful for the great work you are doing for us all, just suggesting proved methods to make it easier and faster for both you and the authors, and more importantly higher Fi, but you are indeed free to ignore my positive (hopefully) criticism.
