Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.misc > #1911 > unrolled thread

Re: ebooks

Started byRS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com>
First post2014-03-23 12:06 +0000
Last post2014-03-23 19:23 -0400
Articles 20 on this page of 165 — 42 participants

Back to article view | Back to comp.misc

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.


Contents

  Re: ebooks RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-03-23 12:06 +0000
    Re: ebooks "Stanley Daniel de Liver" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2014-03-23 12:11 +0000
      Re: ebooks Whiskers <catwheezel@operamail.com> - 2014-03-23 14:43 +0000
        Re: ebooks Hils <hils@saynotospam.net> - 2014-03-23 16:14 +0000
        Re: ebooks root <NoEMail@home.org> - 2014-03-23 18:09 +0000
          Re: ebooks "Stanley Daniel de Liver" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2014-03-23 19:21 +0000
          Re: ebooks Whiskers <catwheezel@operamail.com> - 2014-03-23 20:34 +0000
            Re: ebooks Alan Bowler <atbowler@thinkage.ca> - 2014-06-13 14:14 -0400
              Re: ebooks "Stanley Daniel de Liver" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2014-06-13 21:44 +0100
              Re: ebooks Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2014-06-13 16:53 -0400
                Re: ebooks Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2014-06-14 08:37 +0100
                  Re: ebooks Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2014-06-14 18:34 -0400
                  Re: ebooks RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-06-15 10:40 +0000
                    Re: ebooks "Stanley Daniel de Liver" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2014-06-15 12:05 +0100
                      Re: ebooks Bob Eager <news0002@eager.cx> - 2014-06-15 11:20 +0000
                        Re: ebooks "Stanley Daniel de Liver" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2014-06-15 12:37 +0100
                          Re: ebooks root <NoEMail@home.org> - 2014-06-15 17:48 +0000
                            Re: ebooks Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2014-06-15 15:59 -0400
                              Re: ebooks "Oeter Johns" <oj19854@nospam.com> - 2014-06-16 06:30 +1000
                                Re: ebooks Andy Leighton <andyl@azaal.plus.com> - 2014-06-16 04:04 -0500
                                  Re: ebooks Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2014-06-16 11:44 +0000
                                  Re: ebooks Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2014-06-16 10:32 -0400
                                    Re: ebooks Andy Leighton <andyl@azaal.plus.com> - 2014-06-16 10:43 -0500
                                      Re: ebooks Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2014-06-16 13:13 -0400
                                      Re: ebooks "Oeter Johns" <oj19854@nospam.com> - 2014-06-17 06:45 +1000
                                    Re: ebooks "Oeter Johns" <oj19854@nospam.com> - 2014-06-17 06:36 +1000
                        Re: ebooks RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-06-15 22:43 +0000
                          Re: ebooks Bob Eager <news0002@eager.cx> - 2014-06-15 23:26 +0000
                            Re: ebooks "Stanley Daniel de Liver" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2014-06-16 22:01 +0100
                Re: ebooks "Oeter Johns" <oj19854@nospam.com> - 2014-06-15 06:27 +1000
        Re: ebooks "Stanley Daniel de Liver" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2014-03-23 19:09 +0000
        Re: ebooks Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-03-24 01:55 +0000
          Re: ebooks Whiskers <catwheezel@operamail.com> - 2014-03-24 10:35 +0000
            Re: ebooks Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> - 2014-03-24 13:01 -0400
              Re: ebooks Dag-Erling Smørgrav <des@des.no> - 2014-03-24 17:15 +0100
            Re: ebooks Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2014-03-24 15:07 +0000
              Re: ebooks Rich <rich@example.com> - 2014-03-24 17:13 +0000
                Re: ebooks Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2014-03-24 13:07 -0500
                  Re: ebooks "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2014-03-24 13:28 -0500
                    Re: ebooks Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-03-24 21:48 +0100
                      Re: ebooks Whiskers <catwheezel@operamail.com> - 2014-03-24 22:57 +0000
                    Re: ebooks "Lanto J." <lantoj78@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 08:14 +1100
                      Re: ebooks Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-03-25 00:01 +0000
                        Re: ebooks "Lanto J." <lantoj78@gmail.com> - 2014-03-26 07:17 +1100
                          Re: ebooks Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-03-25 23:44 +0000
                            Re: ebooks "Lanto J." <lantoj78@gmail.com> - 2014-03-26 12:01 +1100
                            Re: ebooks Whiskers <catwheezel@operamail.com> - 2014-03-26 13:36 +0000
                              Re: ebooks "Stanley Daniel de Liver" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2014-03-26 20:08 +0000
                  Re: ebooks Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2014-03-24 14:48 -0400
                    Re: ebooks Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz <spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid> - 2014-03-25 18:13 -0400
                      Re: ebooks Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2014-03-27 01:20 -0400
                  Re: ebooks Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2014-03-25 05:49 +0000
                    Re: ebooks Hils <hils@saynotospam.net> - 2014-03-25 07:06 +0000
                      Re: ebooks Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2014-03-25 08:19 -0500
                        Re: ebooks Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2014-03-25 09:40 -0400
                          Re: ebooks "Slp" <slp0987@nospam.com> - 2014-03-26 11:14 +1100
                        Re: ebooks Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> - 2014-03-25 15:42 -0400
                          Re: ebooks Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-03-25 11:47 -0500
                          Re: ebooks Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz <spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid> - 2014-03-25 19:25 -0400
                            Re: ebooks Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> - 2014-03-26 12:19 -0400
                              Re: ebooks Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-03-26 08:25 -0500
                                Re: ebooks Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz <spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid> - 2014-03-26 16:01 -0400
                                  Re: ebooks RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-03-26 20:38 +0000
                                    Re: ebooks "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2014-03-27 08:19 +1100
                                  Re: ebooks Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-03-26 15:58 -0500
                                    Re: ebooks Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz <spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid> - 2014-03-27 06:28 -0400
                                  Re: ebooks Dag-Erling Smørgrav <des@des.no> - 2014-03-26 22:03 +0100
                                  Re: ebooks Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2014-03-27 00:46 -0400
                                Re: ebooks "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2014-03-26 15:01 -0500
                                  Re: ebooks scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2014-03-26 20:57 +0000
                                    Re: ebooks "Stanley Daniel de Liver" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2014-03-27 13:23 +0000
                                      Re: ebooks Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-03-27 17:48 +0100
                                  Re: ebooks Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-03-27 08:26 -0500
                                    Re: ebooks greymausg <maus@mail.com> - 2014-03-27 14:55 +0000
                                    Re: ebooks "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2014-03-27 10:05 -0500
                                      Re: ebooks Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-03-27 11:55 -0500
                                        Re: ebooks "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2014-03-27 14:25 -0500
                                          Re: ebooks scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2014-03-27 20:44 +0000
                                          Re: ebooks Johny B Good <johnny-b-good@invalid.ntlworld.com> - 2014-03-28 01:38 +0000
                                            Re: ebooks "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2014-03-27 22:37 -0500
                                              Re: ebooks Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2014-03-27 23:52 -0400
                                                Re: ebooks "Slp" <slp0987@nospam.com> - 2014-03-28 16:07 +1100
                                          Re: ebooks Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-03-28 10:52 -0500
                                            Re: ebooks "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2014-03-28 11:57 -0500
                                              Re: ebooks Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-03-28 14:41 -0500
                                              Re: ebooks Whiskers <catwheezel@operamail.com> - 2014-03-28 21:27 +0000
                                                Re: ebooks "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2014-03-28 17:02 -0500
                                                Re: ebooks Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> - 2014-03-28 23:46 -0400
                                              Re: ebooks Philip Shaw <jnufcvyvuc@tznvy.pbz> - 2014-04-02 01:32 +0000
                                                Re: ebooks Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-04-02 14:28 +0000
                                                  Re: ebooks Philip Shaw <jnufcvyvuc@tznvy.pbz> - 2014-04-07 05:32 +0000
                                                    Re: ebooks "John" <j@j.j> - 2014-04-17 16:36 -0700
                                                Re: ebooks "Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2014-04-02 07:31 -0800
                              Re: ebooks scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2014-03-26 13:38 +0000
                                Re: ebooks Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-03-26 11:14 -0500
                                  Re: ebooks Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2014-03-27 00:56 -0400
                                    Re: ebooks Clark G <clarkm.geimsler@ieeemmm.org> - 2014-03-27 16:52 +0000
                                      Re: ebooks "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2014-03-27 14:03 -0500
                                      Re: ebooks Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2014-03-27 23:07 -0400
                                      Re: ebooks Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-03-27 21:44 +0100
                              Re: ebooks Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-03-26 13:51 +0000
                              Re: ebooks "Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2014-03-26 09:22 -0800
                                Re: ebooks "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2014-03-26 13:54 -0500
                                Re: ebooks davidmylastname@acm.org (David Griffith) - 2014-03-27 03:41 +0000
                                  Re: ebooks Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2014-03-27 07:36 -0400
                                    Re: ebooks Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz <spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid> - 2014-03-28 03:40 -0400
                                  Re: ebooks Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-03-27 17:59 +0100
                              Re: ebooks Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2014-03-26 15:38 -0700
                                Re: ebooks Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2014-03-26 22:09 -0400
                                  Re: ebooks "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2014-03-27 13:55 -0500
                                    Re: ebooks Johny B Good <johnny-b-good@invalid.ntlworld.com> - 2014-03-28 02:27 +0000
                                      Re: ebooks cb@bobby.df.lth.se (Christian Brunschen) - 2014-03-28 10:42 +0000
                                    Re: ebooks Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2014-03-27 23:12 -0400
                                  Re: ebooks Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2014-03-28 23:17 -0700
                              Re: ebooks Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz <spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid> - 2014-03-26 16:06 -0400
                          Re: ebooks "Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2014-03-26 09:19 -0800
                            Re: ebooks "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2014-03-26 13:50 -0500
                              Re: ebooks Hils <hils@saynotospam.net> - 2014-03-26 20:00 +0000
                              Re: ebooks "Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2014-03-26 13:30 -0800
                                Re: ebooks Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-03-26 15:51 -0500
                            Re: ebooks Will Honea <whonea@whonea.net> - 2014-03-26 13:09 -0600
                            Re: ebooks Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> - 2014-03-26 19:23 -0400
                              Re: ebooks "Slp" <slp0987@nospam.com> - 2014-03-27 08:12 +1100
                                Re: ebooks despen@verizon.net (Dan.Espen) - 2014-03-26 19:24 -0400
                            Re: ebooks Johny B Good <johnny-b-good@invalid.ntlworld.com> - 2014-03-26 23:40 +0000
                              Re: ebooks Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz <spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid> - 2014-03-27 06:36 -0400
                                Knuth/TeX (was Re: ebooks) RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-03-27 14:33 +0000
                                  Re: Knuth/TeX (was Re: ebooks) "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2014-03-27 14:01 -0500
                            Re: ebooks rpw3@rpw3.org (Rob Warnock) - 2014-03-27 03:10 +0000
                      Re: ebooks Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-03-25 08:19 -0500
                        Re: ebooks Whiskers <catwheezel@operamail.com> - 2014-03-25 15:16 +0000
                      Re: ebooks Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-03-25 13:32 +0000
                        Re: ebooks RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-03-25 15:20 +0000
                          Re: ebooks Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> - 2014-03-25 15:49 -0400
                            Re: ebooks RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-03-25 15:58 +0000
                            Re: ebooks Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2014-03-27 01:46 -0400
                          Re: ebooks "Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2014-03-25 08:48 -0800
                            Re: ebooks RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-03-25 21:20 +0000
                    Re: ebooks "Slp" <slp0987@nospam.com> - 2014-03-26 07:31 +1100
                  Re: ebooks Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz <spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid> - 2014-03-25 08:42 -0400
                Re: ebooks Will Honea <whonea@whonea.net> - 2014-03-24 12:52 -0600
              Re: ebooks Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> - 2014-03-24 20:12 -0400
                Re: ebooks Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-03-24 15:54 -0500
                Re: ebooks Rob Myers <rob@robmyers.org> - 2014-03-24 22:19 +0000
              Re: ebooks "Slp" <slp0987@nospam.com> - 2014-03-25 07:54 +1100
            Re: ebooks scott@alfter.diespammersdie.us (Scott Alfter) - 2014-03-24 16:21 +0000
            Re: ebooks Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-03-24 17:02 +0000
              Re: ebooks Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2014-03-24 12:21 -0500
              Re: ebooks Bob Eager <news0002@eager.cx> - 2014-03-24 19:50 +0000
                Re: ebooks Whiskers <catwheezel@operamail.com> - 2014-03-24 22:48 +0000
                  Re: ebooks Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-03-24 23:42 +0000
                    Re: ebooks Whiskers <catwheezel@operamail.com> - 2014-03-25 15:07 +0000
                      Re: ebooks Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-03-25 23:40 +0000
                        Re: ebooks Dag-Erling Smørgrav <des@des.no> - 2014-03-26 21:57 +0100
                          Re: ebooks Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-03-28 13:58 +0000
                            Re: ebooks Dag-Erling Smørgrav <des@des.no> - 2014-03-28 15:44 +0100
                      Re: ebooks "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2014-03-26 11:35 +1100
            Re: ebooks "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 07:28 +1100
              Re: ebooks Whiskers <catwheezel@operamail.com> - 2014-03-24 22:31 +0000
                Re: ebooks Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-03-25 00:06 +0000
                Re: ebooks "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2014-03-26 07:06 +1100
            Re: ebooks Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz <spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid> - 2014-03-24 10:25 -0400
        Re: ebooks Mike Sanders <mike@taco-shack.cow> - 2014-03-24 06:04 +0000
        Re: ebooks Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-03-26 13:17 +0100
    Re: ebooks Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> - 2014-03-23 19:23 -0400

Page 4 of 9 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9  Next page →


#2015

FromStephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org>
Date2014-03-26 08:25 -0500
Message-ID<lgukh1$445$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#2013
On 26-Mar-14 11:19, Peter Flass wrote:
> I occasionally find such errors in professionally published stuff,
> but it's rare - finding one in a book is unusual, although errors
> are getting more common.  Self-published stuff seems to have a factor
> of ten or more errors.

The professionally-edited stuff I've seen seems to bottom out at around
one error per page, amateurly-edited stuff around one per paragraph, and
un-edited stuff at worse than one per sentence.  So, even a bad editor
adds value, at least for some authors.

OTOH, that's for fiction; I don't read enough non-fiction to have a good
idea of what the relative error rates are.

S

-- 
Stephen Sprunk         "God does not play dice."  --Albert Einstein
CCIE #3723         "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the
K5SSS        dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#2031

FromShmuel (Seymour J.) Metz <spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid>
Date2014-03-26 16:01 -0400
Message-ID<53333224$2$fuzhry+tra$mr2ice@news.patriot.net>
In reply to#2015
In <lgukh1$445$1@dont-email.me>, on 03/26/2014
   at 08:25 AM, Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> said:

>The professionally-edited stuff I've seen seems to bottom out at
>around one error per page, amateurly-edited stuff around one per
>paragraph, and un-edited stuff at worse than one per sentence.  
>So, even a bad editor adds value, at least for some authors.

What about the error rates for reprints, e.g., are their more errors
with raw OCR or with editied OCR?

-- 
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT  <http://patriot.net/~shmuel>

Unsolicited bulk E-mail subject to legal action.  I reserve the
right to publicly post or ridicule any abusive E-mail.  Reply to
domain Patriot dot net user shmuel+news to contact me.  Do not
reply to spamtrap@library.lspace.org

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#2036

FromRS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com>
Date2014-03-26 20:38 +0000
Message-ID<lgvdrj$l8i$1@solani.org>
In reply to#2031
On 2014-03-26, Shmuel Metz <spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid> wrote:
> What about the error rates for reprints, e.g., are their more errors
> with raw OCR or with editied OCR?


You just reminded me of something that irritates me: a surprising number
of ebooks have errors the print editions don't.  I think the old
publishers are reluctantly producing ebooks, but not taking the heart to
do it right: they're OCRing print editions or something, and not making
much effort to correct errors.  I can't give you a specific example but
I read a novel published by a house like Penguin, and it had a number of
errors that looked suspiciously like a faulty optical character
recognition routine.

Yet, they charge full price for the ebook.  Fire and pitchforks, I say!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#2043

From"Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com>
Date2014-03-27 08:19 +1100
Message-ID<bpgul7FmolpU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#2036

"RS Wood" <rsw@therandymon.com> wrote in message 
news:lgvdrj$l8i$1@solani.org...
> On 2014-03-26, Shmuel Metz <spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid> wrote:
>> What about the error rates for reprints, e.g., are their more errors
>> with raw OCR or with editied OCR?
>
>
> You just reminded me of something that irritates me: a surprising number
> of ebooks have errors the print editions don't.  I think the old
> publishers are reluctantly producing ebooks, but not taking the heart to
> do it right: they're OCRing print editions or something, and not making
> much effort to correct errors.  I can't give you a specific example but
> I read a novel published by a house like Penguin, and it had a number of
> errors that looked suspiciously like a faulty optical character
> recognition routine.

Presumably because their operation is now much more
marginal than it was economically so they choose not
to pay the substantial cost of decent proof reading
and are reluctant to get it done in India etc.

> Yet, they charge full price for the ebook.

Likely because they don’t want to undercut what
market they still have with the dead tree books.

> Fire and pitchforks, I say!

 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#2040

FromStephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org>
Date2014-03-26 15:58 -0500
Message-ID<lgvf18$ttg$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#2031
On 26-Mar-14 15:01, Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz wrote:
> In <lgukh1$445$1@dont-email.me>, on 03/26/2014
>    at 08:25 AM, Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> said:
>> The professionally-edited stuff I've seen seems to bottom out at
>> around one error per page, amateurly-edited stuff around one per
>> paragraph, and un-edited stuff at worse than one per sentence.  
>> So, even a bad editor adds value, at least for some authors.
> 
> What about the error rates for reprints, e.g., are their more errors
> with raw OCR or with editied OCR?

Raw OCR error rates depend mostly on the quality of the image and of the
software, and the types of errors tend to be quite different from ones
originating with the author--and I suspect more likely to be caught by
an editor or even automated spelling/grammar checkers.

S

-- 
Stephen Sprunk         "God does not play dice."  --Albert Einstein
CCIE #3723         "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the
K5SSS        dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#2061

FromShmuel (Seymour J.) Metz <spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid>
Date2014-03-27 06:28 -0400
Message-ID<5333fd5d$4$fuzhry+tra$mr2ice@news.patriot.net>
In reply to#2040
In <lgvf18$ttg$1@dont-email.me>, on 03/26/2014
   at 03:58 PM, Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> said:

>Raw OCR error rates depend mostly on the quality of the image and 
>of the software, and the types of errors tend to be quite 
>different from ones originating with the author--and I suspect 
>more likely to be caught by an editor or even automated 
>spelling/grammar checkers.

My concern was errors introduced in a reprint, which almost certainly
did not involve the author, especially if he is deceased.

-- 
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT  <http://patriot.net/~shmuel>

Unsolicited bulk E-mail subject to legal action.  I reserve the
right to publicly post or ridicule any abusive E-mail.  Reply to
domain Patriot dot net user shmuel+news to contact me.  Do not
reply to spamtrap@library.lspace.org

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#2041

FromDag-Erling Smørgrav <des@des.no>
Date2014-03-26 22:03 +0100
Message-ID<86mwgc7jvz.fsf@nine.des.no>
In reply to#2031
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz <spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid> writes:
> What about the error rates for reprints, e.g., are their more errors
> with raw OCR or with editied OCR?

I read the Hornblower series on Kindle a few years ago.  The early
novels were chock-full of OCR errors; they had very clearly not been
proof-read at all.

DES
-- 
Dag-Erling Smørgrav - des@des.no

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#2053

FromMichael Black <et472@ncf.ca>
Date2014-03-27 00:46 -0400
Message-ID<alpine.LNX.2.02.1403270044520.14705@darkstar.example.org>
In reply to#2031
On Wed, 26 Mar 2014, Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz wrote:

> In <lgukh1$445$1@dont-email.me>, on 03/26/2014
>   at 08:25 AM, Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> said:
>
>> The professionally-edited stuff I've seen seems to bottom out at
>> around one error per page, amateurly-edited stuff around one per
>> paragraph, and un-edited stuff at worse than one per sentence.
>> So, even a bad editor adds value, at least for some authors.
>
> What about the error rates for reprints, e.g., are their more errors
> with raw OCR or with editied OCR?
>
I started to read one of my great great great grandfather's books, now in 
ebook form.  A lot of weird characters there, so clearly someone scanned 
it, ocr'd it, and then never checked to make sure it was intact.  But I've 
never seen the books as books, so I don't feel I could start to fix them.

   Michael

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#2033

From"Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net>
Date2014-03-26 15:01 -0500
Message-ID<bpgq07Flo2gU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#2015
"Stephen Sprunk" wrote:

> The professionally-edited stuff I've seen seems to bottom out at around
> one error per page, ....

I took _Time_ magazine for many years.  As near as I can recall I *never* 
saw a single error in grammar or spelling. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#2038

Fromscott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
Date2014-03-26 20:57 +0000
Message-ID<WaHYu.1$0M2.0@fx10.iad>
In reply to#2033
"Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> writes:
>"Stephen Sprunk" wrote:
>
>> The professionally-edited stuff I've seen seems to bottom out at around
>> one error per page, ....
>
>I took _Time_ magazine for many years.  As near as I can recall I *never* 
>saw a single error in grammar or spelling. 

On the Journalistic other hand, the _Muscatine Journal_ used to have
both grammar and spelling errors in most every issue.  One memorable one
was on the editorial page during the xmas holidays, where Christ lay
in a manager.

scott

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#2064

From"Stanley Daniel de Liver" <admin@127.0.0.1>
Date2014-03-27 13:23 +0000
Message-ID<op.xddt44vgo4et73@dell3100>
In reply to#2038
On Wed, 26 Mar 2014 20:57:26 -0000, Scott Lurndal <scott@slp53.sl.home>  
wrote:

> "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> writes:
>> "Stephen Sprunk" wrote:
>>
>>> The professionally-edited stuff I've seen seems to bottom out at around
>>> one error per page, ....
>>
>> I took _Time_ magazine for many years.  As near as I can recall I  
>> *never*
>> saw a single error in grammar or spelling.
>
> On the Journalistic other hand, the _Muscatine Journal_ used to have
> both grammar and spelling errors in most every issue.  One memorable one
> was on the editorial page during the xmas holidays, where Christ lay
> in a manager.
>
In the UK we have the Grauniad (Guardian), so called because they'd even  
miss typos in headlines.
Computers may have actually helped here.
> scott


-- 
It's a money /life balance.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#2077

FromPaul Sture <nospam@sture.ch>
Date2014-03-27 17:48 +0100
Message-ID<ic1e0b-toa1.ln1@news.chingola.ch>
In reply to#2064
On 2014-03-27, Stanley Daniel de Liver <admin@127.0.0.1> wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Mar 2014 20:57:26 -0000, Scott Lurndal <scott@slp53.sl.home>  
> wrote:
>
>> "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> writes:
>>> "Stephen Sprunk" wrote:
>>>
>>>> The professionally-edited stuff I've seen seems to bottom out at around
>>>> one error per page, ....
>>>
>>> I took _Time_ magazine for many years.  As near as I can recall I  
>>> *never*
>>> saw a single error in grammar or spelling.
>>
>> On the Journalistic other hand, the _Muscatine Journal_ used to have
>> both grammar and spelling errors in most every issue.  One memorable one
>> was on the editorial page during the xmas holidays, where Christ lay
>> in a manager.
>>
> In the UK we have the Grauniad (Guardian), so called because they'd even  
> miss typos in headlines.

My private theory was that the typesetters visited the pub before starting
work, but it might have been union 'working practices' as well.

> Computers may have actually helped here.

Yes.

-- 
Paul Sture

"In that case," said Napoleon, "let us wait twenty minutes; when the enemy
is making a false movement we must take good care not to interrupt him."

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#2065

FromStephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org>
Date2014-03-27 08:26 -0500
Message-ID<lh18uq$59i$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#2033
On 26-Mar-14 15:01, Osmium wrote:
> "Stephen Sprunk" wrote:
>> The professionally-edited stuff I've seen seems to bottom out at
>> around one error per page, ....
>> 
>> OTOH, that's for fiction; I don't read enough non-fiction to have
>> a good idea of what the relative error rates are.
> 
> I took _Time_ magazine for many years.  As near as I can recall I
> *never* saw a single error in grammar or spelling.

Are you classifying _Time_ as fiction or non-fiction?

S

-- 
Stephen Sprunk         "God does not play dice."  --Albert Einstein
CCIE #3723         "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the
K5SSS        dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#2072

Fromgreymausg <maus@mail.com>
Date2014-03-27 14:55 +0000
Message-ID<slrnlj8dk5.jku.maus@gmaus.org>
In reply to#2065
On 2014-03-27, Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote:
> On 26-Mar-14 15:01, Osmium wrote:
>> "Stephen Sprunk" wrote:
>>> The professionally-edited stuff I've seen seems to bottom out at
>>> around one error per page, ....
>>> 
>>> OTOH, that's for fiction; I don't read enough non-fiction to have
>>> a good idea of what the relative error rates are.
>> 
>> I took _Time_ magazine for many years.  As near as I can recall I
>> *never* saw a single error in grammar or spelling.
>
> Are you classifying _Time_ as fiction or non-fiction?

I gave up Time around the end of Vietnam War. Before the US army arrived
, it had been full of opinions of retired US army generals on how the
US Army would mop up the VietCong in a couple of weeks.

(Last weeks, when the hawks in US were screaming for `intervention i
n Ukraine, brought that all back.)


-- 
maus
 .
  .
...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#2073

From"Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net>
Date2014-03-27 10:05 -0500
Message-ID<bpit1hF4ii3U1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#2065
"Stephen Sprunk" wrote:

> On 26-Mar-14 15:01, Osmium wrote:
>> "Stephen Sprunk" wrote:
>>> The professionally-edited stuff I've seen seems to bottom out at
>>> around one error per page, ....
>>>
>>> OTOH, that's for fiction; I don't read enough non-fiction to have
>>> a good idea of what the relative error rates are.
>>
>> I took _Time_ magazine for many years.  As near as I can recall I
>> *never* saw a single error in grammar or spelling.
>
> Are you classifying _Time_ as fiction or non-fiction?

Neither, that discussion has different dimensions.  I am suggesting that the 
one error per page you are seeing is the result of the fact that editors are 
no longer in the loop. They followed the Linotype operators out the door. I 
seriously doubt that any competent - not good, just competent - editor would 
allow anything near one error per page to pass his scrutiny.

I pretty much quit reading fiction qua fiction shortly after I got out of 
high school.  There is enough nonsense to filter already without purposely 
allowing novelists to plant interesting but wild factoids in my head.  There 
is a good book right there,.  Common knowledge that originated in a 
novelists vivid imagination. "List" books were popular a few years ago, it 
could be a list book.

Made up example: Dentists are suicidal.  Discuss 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#2076

FromStephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org>
Date2014-03-27 11:55 -0500
Message-ID<lh1l56$5th$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#2073
On 27-Mar-14 10:05, Osmium wrote:
> "Stephen Sprunk" wrote:
>> On 26-Mar-14 15:01, Osmium wrote:
>>> "Stephen Sprunk" wrote:
>>>> The professionally-edited stuff I've seen seems to bottom out
>>>> at around one error per page, ....
>>>> 
>>>> OTOH, that's for fiction; I don't read enough non-fiction to
>>>> have a good idea of what the relative error rates are.
>>> 
>>> I took _Time_ magazine for many years.  As near as I can recall
>>> I *never* saw a single error in grammar or spelling.
>> 
>> Are you classifying _Time_ as fiction or non-fiction?
> 
> Neither, that discussion has different dimensions.  I am suggesting
> that the one error per page you are seeing is the result of the fact
> that editors are no longer in the loop. They followed the Linotype
> operators out the door. I seriously doubt that any competent - not
> good, just competent - editor would allow anything near one error per
> page to pass his scrutiny.

I suspect the editors are still around but they're either not as
competent as (or more lax than) expected.  It's mostly stuff like faulty
parallelism ("I like dogs and to swim") or improper cases ("if I was a
dog"), but now and then even obvious errors like homophones or
missing/extra commas will slip through.

I speed-read fiction, so I don't usually notice the less obvious errors
unless they cause my brain to mis-parse a sentence and throw an
exception, but when re-reading slowly I'll see them, and I'll then
notice other errors in the vicinity.  I can't read entire novels at
normal speed because the errors are so frequent as to distract from the
story.  And that's even with books on the NYT bestseller list in at
least their second printing (since I only buy paperbacks), where you'd
expect higher standards.

S

-- 
Stephen Sprunk         "God does not play dice."  --Albert Einstein
CCIE #3723         "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the
K5SSS        dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#2082

From"Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net>
Date2014-03-27 14:25 -0500
Message-ID<bpjc9lF7r7gU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#2076
"Stephen Sprunk" wrote:

> I suspect the editors are still around but they're either not as
> competent as (or more lax than) expected.  It's mostly stuff like faulty
> parallelism ("I like dogs and to swim") or improper cases ("if I was a
> dog"), but now and then even obvious errors like homophones or
> missing/extra commas will slip through.

I was trying to figure out if the fuel bladder on a  757 was empty or full 
of nitrogen or what.  Turns out there is no bladder, it's fuel in an 
aluminum container.  (Which leaves my question unresolved.)  In any event, 
_The Seattle Times_ had this:

"Another contrast between the machine shops of Auburn and other Boeing 
divisions is that many Auburn workers have now idea what they're making. The 
shapes they create often seem almost abstract. "
And your guess is that a human read that?  It is almost surely a spell 
checker induced error.

Looks like an interesting - but very long - article.  I wish I had time to 
read it. Note that this is part 4 of 8.

http://seattletimes.com/news/business/757/part04/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#2084

Fromscott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
Date2014-03-27 20:44 +0000
Message-ID<T40Zu.3$_T5.2@fx32.iad>
In reply to#2082
"Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> writes:
>"Stephen Sprunk" wrote:
>
>> I suspect the editors are still around but they're either not as
>> competent as (or more lax than) expected.  It's mostly stuff like faulty
>> parallelism ("I like dogs and to swim") or improper cases ("if I was a
>> dog"), but now and then even obvious errors like homophones or
>> missing/extra commas will slip through.
>
>I was trying to figure out if the fuel bladder on a  757 was empty or full 
>of nitrogen or what.  Turns out there is no bladder, it's fuel in an 
>aluminum container.  (Which leaves my question unresolved.)  In any event, 
>_The Seattle Times_ had this:

Inert gas is used on military aircraft.   There was some push after
the TWA 747 mid-air explosion to add inerting systems to commercial
aircraft.   Not as a retrofit, but as a requirement for new designs
(I believe the 787 may have a fuel system inerting mechanism).

scott

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#2087

FromJohny B Good <johnny-b-good@invalid.ntlworld.com>
Date2014-03-28 01:38 +0000
Message-ID<51k9j91oikf87f6kncb7e54abcuq31khhn@4ax.com>
In reply to#2082
On Thu, 27 Mar 2014 14:25:40 -0500, "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net>
wrote:

>"Stephen Sprunk" wrote:
>
>> I suspect the editors are still around but they're either not as
>> competent as (or more lax than) expected.  It's mostly stuff like faulty
>> parallelism ("I like dogs and to swim") or improper cases ("if I was a
>> dog"), but now and then even obvious errors like homophones or
>> missing/extra commas will slip through.
>
>I was trying to figure out if the fuel bladder on a  757 was empty or full 
>of nitrogen or what.  Turns out there is no bladder, it's fuel in an 
>aluminum container.  (Which leaves my question unresolved.)  In any event, 
>_The Seattle Times_ had this:
>
>"Another contrast between the machine shops of Auburn and other Boeing 
>divisions is that many Auburn workers have now idea what they're making. The 
>shapes they create often seem almost abstract. "
>And your guess is that a human read that?  It is almost surely a spell 
>checker induced error.
>
>Looks like an interesting - but very long - article.  I wish I had time to 
>read it. Note that this is part 4 of 8.
>
>http://seattletimes.com/news/business/757/part04/
>

 I missed the error at first reading and it took a very careful second
reading to spot it.

 It's not absolutely clear how the following arose:-

 "many Auburn workers have now idea what they're making.".

 The error might not be the simple addition of 'w' to the end of 'no'.

 It could simply be due to a 'brain fart' on the author's part who may
have intended to write:-

 "many Auburn workers now have no idea what they're making."

 which seems the more likely intended wording from the context.
-- 
Regards, J B Good

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#2091

From"Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net>
Date2014-03-27 22:37 -0500
Message-ID<bpk93kFdhooU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#2087
"Johny B Good" wrote:

> On Thu, 27 Mar 2014 14:25:40 -0500, "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net>
> wrote:
>
>>"Stephen Sprunk" wrote:
>>
>>> I suspect the editors are still around but they're either not as
>>> competent as (or more lax than) expected.  It's mostly stuff like faulty
>>> parallelism ("I like dogs and to swim") or improper cases ("if I was a
>>> dog"), but now and then even obvious errors like homophones or
>>> missing/extra commas will slip through.
>>
>>I was trying to figure out if the fuel bladder on a  757 was empty or full
>>of nitrogen or what.  Turns out there is no bladder, it's fuel in an
>>aluminum container.  (Which leaves my question unresolved.)  In any event,
>>_The Seattle Times_ had this:
>>
>>"Another contrast between the machine shops of Auburn and other Boeing
>>divisions is that many Auburn workers have now idea what they're making. 
>>The
>>shapes they create often seem almost abstract. "
>>And your guess is that a human read that?  It is almost surely a spell
>>checker induced error.
>>
>>Looks like an interesting - but very long - article.  I wish I had time to
>>read it. Note that this is part 4 of 8.
>>
>>http://seattletimes.com/news/business/757/part04/
>>
>
> I missed the error at first reading and it took a very careful second
> reading to spot it.
>
> It's not absolutely clear how the following arose:-
>
> "many Auburn workers have now idea what they're making.".
>
> The error might not be the simple addition of 'w' to the end of 'no'.
>
> It could simply be due to a 'brain fart' on the author's part who may
> have intended to write:-
>
> "many Auburn workers now have no idea what they're making."
>
> which seems the more likely intended wording from the context.

And sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

In any event, it is crystal clear to me that a large, metropolitan newspaper 
put out a *major piece*  without proofreading. This is not a last minute 
thing about a small bonfire almost getting out of control

From what I saw, a very good job of writing too.  What a shame. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


Page 4 of 9 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.misc


csiph-web