J

My feedback

  1. 89 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    Open - Ongoing process  ·  10 comments  ·  Search improvements  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    J commented  · 

    The font is no excuse.

    I've just used Google keep and "extract text" using an image downloaded from the BNA site - the article that made me look here. About 99% success, compared to less than 10%. The BNA OCR attempt was utter garbage, with a multitude of non-normal characters such as
    "cultivator y® •®f honours. "
    "continued to . ~ * • -ijii rr*, live "
    "of the dung, and PJ trick : ft . r * v ett - was fc *• , . .. . , , , , Westminster School,"

    Google Keep gave spelling errors, and wrong letters but not this waste of space.

    The BNA also has utterly strange ways of selecting parts of the page to scan together, because in every article I have seen so far, the sections are a complete mix of different things. Mine is a farming report merged (BNA didn't spot the column divider!) with the Death of a Marquis, plus the Intelligence from Cambridge University. an Arrest Report intermingled with both bits.

    How on earth dare the BNA suggest that their OCR is accurate?

    J supported this idea  · 
  2. 9 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    2 comments  ·  Website improvements » feedback  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    J commented  · 
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    J commented  · 

    i CAME TO SPECIFICALLY MAKE THIS COMMENT. Newspapers from Cambridgeshire in the 1800s that I have been researching have appalling OCR.

    J supported this idea  · 
  3. 1 vote
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Search improvements  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    J shared this idea  · 
  4. 23 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    2 comments  ·  Search improvements  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    J commented  · 

    Absolutely. It seems ludicrous that the download gives NO IDEA of where you were looking. As it is, it would be better as an image that I could run through PROPER OCR and get a better transcription.
    It would need to include the corrections that kind hearted people have made.

    The cheap scanner I have lets me save a scan as a searchable pdf. How hard can it be?

    How can it take 6 years to review how hard this improvement might be?

  5. 7 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    2 comments  ·  Search improvements  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    J commented  · 
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    J commented  · 

    Absolutely. Sadly I've now used my votes on similar suggestions.

  6. 64 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    Open - Under review  ·  12 comments  ·  Search improvements » Search  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    J supported this idea  · 
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    J commented  · 

    How can this be under review for 6 years? Search is nearly as bad as the OCR. I use advanced and exact phrase, yet in the resulting images, every single word in that phrase is highlighted in the article individually.

  7. 18 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    1 comment  ·  Search improvements  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    J commented  · 

    Then when the page is highlighted to show your search phrases, each word in that exact phrase is shown individually. The search is on a par with that of Amazon, i.e. not fit for purpose.

  8. 8 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Search improvements » Search  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    J supported this idea  · 
  9. 18 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    1 comment  ·  Search improvements » Search  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    J supported this idea  · 
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    J commented  · 

    I've just tried it on the article that made me look here. About 95% success, compared to less than 10%. The BNA OCR attempt was utter garbage, with a multitude of non-normal characters such as
    "cultivator y® •®f honours. "
    "continued to . ~ * • -ijii rr*, live "
    "of the dung, and PJ trick : ft . r * v ett - was fc *• , . .. . , , , , Westminster School,"

    Running a portion of the image as downloaded through Google Keep gave spelling errors, and wrong letters but not this waste of space.

    The BNA also has utterly strange ways of selecting parts of the page to scan together, because in every article I have seen so far, the sections are a complete mix of different things. Mine is a farming report merged (BNA didn't spot the column divider!) with the Death of a Marquis, plus the Intelligence from Cambridge University. an Arrest Report intermingled with both bits.

    How on earth dare the BNA suggest that their OCR is accurate?

  10. 30 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    4 comments  ·  Website improvements  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    J supported this idea  · 
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    J commented  · 

    I cannot believe that I have been conned in to paying a subscription for abysmal OCR that is embarassing. Rather than keep adding new papers, it might serve them better to run their older papers through modern OCR software.
    I've been a member for a week, and every single article i have found has errors, ranging from poor to abysmal. The reason I came to look here was a paper where the OCR hadn't recognised the columns, so merged two together, and within that hadn't recognised a tenth of the words. Yet there is nothing I can do to report it!

  11. 5 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    1 comment  ·  Website improvements » feedback  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    J commented  · 

    Absolutely. It seems ludicrous that the download gives NO IDEA of where you were looking. As it is, it would be better as an image that I could run through PROPER OCR and get a better transcription.
    It would need to include the corrections that kind hearted people have made.

Feedback and Knowledge Base