FREEBMD-DISCUSS-L Archives

Archiver > FREEBMD-DISCUSS > 2003-09 > 1062923696


From: Dave Mayall <>
Subject: Re: fullstops.
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 09:37:23 +0100
References: <000c01c37468$01c64e20$8b221dc3@LocalHost>
In-Reply-To: <000c01c37468$01c64e20$8b221dc3@LocalHost>


On Sat, 6 Sep 2003 13:02:34 +0200, you wrote:

>The only reasons for putting the fullstops as far as I know are:
>1. Something to do with consistancy in transcribing and the software at FreeBMD and double keying.
>2. A promise to transcribe the data as is.
>
>If the software is based an the accurate transcription of every fullstop, comma, etc, then there is the need to transcribe as is, though I am told that double keying would involve different source, which may not even carry the full stop, though I may have that wrong (David, refresh my memory)
>Other than the two reasons stated above, there is no reason at all to transcribe full stops. The original handwritten scans didn't carry them; they were put there in later versions.
>So:
>perhaps the software can be "rewired" so that full stops have no significance? Then it wouldn't matter if they were transcribed or not.

The software is wired so they have a minimal significance, please see
my explanation previously.

--
Dave Mayall

This thread: