Brian, The check merely indicates the problem exists; changing the check won't make the problem go away. The issue is, I think, whether a non-syndicate transcription is a problem so let me expand on what I said in my original posting. When a file is uploaded the system makes a decision about what syndicate it has been transcribed for and that syndicate (or syndicates if it is ambiguous) is recorded with the file. The information about the syndicate is used in (at least) the following ways: * The Suspect Files <http://www.freebmd.org.uk/SuspectFiles.html> list shows the syndicate of the file; this allows coordinators to see which files they need to be concerned with * Upload Report <http://www.freebmd.org.uk/cgi/upload-report.pl> has the option for the results to be dependent on the syndicate of the file (e.g. list only files transcribed for a particular syndicate) * The coordinator version of Show File <http://www.freebmd.org.uk/cgi/coord-show-file.pl> will allow coordinators to download the file if it has been transcribed for their syndicate * When the database is created the syndicate of the file is used to determine of there is duplication within a syndicate; an entry is not considered to be double keyed if both transcriptions are within a syndicate So it is quite important that the syndicate a file is transcribed for is correct. If it isn't coordinators will be put to extra work and so I don't understand why not having a syndicate could be considered acceptable. Regards Barrie On 19:59, Brian Smart wrote: > Hello Barrie, > Surely the checking system needs to be changed then the problem would not > exist. > Regards > > Brian Smart > > > -----Original Message----- > From: freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com > [mailto:freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Barrie > Sent: 29 July 2010 00:15 > To: freebmd-syndicates@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: RE: Non-syndicate transcriptions > > Brian, > > The clause you mention is not part of the warning; it was part of my > explanation of the possible causes for the warning. > > The system cannot normally differentiate between these these three > causes for the warning, it just knows that the file has not been marked > as transcribed for a syndicate. > > Barrie > > On 19:59, Brian Smart wrote: > >> Hello Barrie, >> Why not remove the cause: "* they have not been added to the syndicate >> > they > >> are transcribing for" from this Warning/error and then the other two >> possible causes can be errors. >> I fail to see why the fact that the person has not been added to the >> syndicate at the time of the upload should constitute a problem in any >> > way. > >> Regards >> >> Brian Smart >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com >> [mailto:freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Barrie >> Sent: 28 July 2010 17:08 >> To: freebmd-syndicates@rootsweb.com >> Subject: Non-syndicate transcriptions >> >> The error that caused transcriptions to erroneous get reported as _not_ >> being done within a user's syndicate has now been corrected. If users >> get the warning >> >> /You do not appear to be a member of a syndicate transcribing this >> quarter. Please check you have the correct Year, Quarter and Event >> or contact your syndicate coordinator./ >> >> the most likely causes are: >> >> * they have not been added to the syndicate they are transcribing for >> * they have transcribed the wrong quarter >> * they have specified the wrong year or quarter or event in the file >> >> Please note that files identified by this warning will not be allocated >> to any syndicate and therefore coordinators will not be able to use >> coordinator facilities (such as UploadReport for a particular syndicate >> or downloading the file) for such a file. If the issue is that the >> transcriber has not been added to the syndicate, it should be possible >> to correct this by the transcriber uploading the file again (once the >> transcriber has been added to the syndicate). You can use >> http://www.freebmd.org.uk/cgi/show-file.pl to check which syndicate a >> file has been transcribed for. >> >> Because of feedback received this will remain a warning rather than >> being upgraded to an error. >> >> Barrie >> >> >> --Certified Virus Free by 4SecureMail.com ICSA-Certified Scanner-- >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> FREEBMD-SYNDICATES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' >> > without > >> the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> >> >> >> >> > > --Certified Virus Free by 4SecureMail.com ICSA-Certified Scanner-- > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > FREEBMD-SYNDICATES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > > --Certified Virus Free by 4SecureMail.com ICSA-Certified Scanner--
Barrie In the WinBMD header, the relevant field is labelled 'Syndicate (or country)' so some transcribers will put England, Australia etc. in there, rather that a syndicate name. In such cases presumably the system has to check whether the quarter the file belongs to is being transcribed by a syndicate on whose list the transcriber appears. Is there any need to give any different advice to transcribers about how to fill in that field? Jeff ----- Original Message ----- From: "Barrie" <freebmd@myarcher.net> To: <freebmd-syndicates@rootsweb.com> Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 5:47 PM Subject: Re: RE: RE: Non-syndicate transcriptions > Brian, > > The check merely indicates the problem exists; changing the check won't > make the problem go away. The issue is, I think, whether a non-syndicate > transcription is a problem so let me expand on what I said in my > original posting. > > When a file is uploaded the system makes a decision about what syndicate > it has been transcribed for and that syndicate (or syndicates if it is > ambiguous) is recorded with the file. The information about the > syndicate is used in (at least) the following ways: > > * The Suspect Files <http://www.freebmd.org.uk/SuspectFiles.html> > list shows the syndicate of the file; this allows coordinators to > see which files they need to be concerned with > * Upload Report <http://www.freebmd.org.uk/cgi/upload-report.pl> has > the option for the results to be dependent on the syndicate of the > file (e.g. list only files transcribed for a particular syndicate) > * The coordinator version of Show File > <http://www.freebmd.org.uk/cgi/coord-show-file.pl> will allow > coordinators to download the file if it has been transcribed for > their syndicate > * When the database is created the syndicate of the file is used to > determine of there is duplication within a syndicate; an entry is > not considered to be double keyed if both transcriptions are > within a syndicate > > So it is quite important that the syndicate a file is transcribed for is > correct. If it isn't coordinators will be put to extra work and so I > don't understand why not having a syndicate could be considered > acceptable. > > Regards > > Barrie > > On 19:59, Brian Smart wrote: >> Hello Barrie, >> Surely the checking system needs to be changed then the problem would not >> exist. >> Regards >> >> Brian Smart >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com >> [mailto:freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Barrie >> Sent: 29 July 2010 00:15 >> To: freebmd-syndicates@rootsweb.com >> Subject: Re: RE: Non-syndicate transcriptions >> >> Brian, >> >> The clause you mention is not part of the warning; it was part of my >> explanation of the possible causes for the warning. >> >> The system cannot normally differentiate between these these three >> causes for the warning, it just knows that the file has not been marked >> as transcribed for a syndicate. >> >> Barrie >> >> On 19:59, Brian Smart wrote: >> >>> Hello Barrie, >>> Why not remove the cause: "* they have not been added to the syndicate >>> >> they >> >>> are transcribing for" from this Warning/error and then the other two >>> possible causes can be errors. >>> I fail to see why the fact that the person has not been added to the >>> syndicate at the time of the upload should constitute a problem in any >>> >> way. >> >>> Regards >>> >>> Brian Smart >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com >>> [mailto:freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Barrie >>> Sent: 28 July 2010 17:08 >>> To: freebmd-syndicates@rootsweb.com >>> Subject: Non-syndicate transcriptions >>> >>> The error that caused transcriptions to erroneous get reported as _not_ >>> being done within a user's syndicate has now been corrected. If users >>> get the warning >>> >>> /You do not appear to be a member of a syndicate transcribing this >>> quarter. Please check you have the correct Year, Quarter and Event >>> or contact your syndicate coordinator./ >>> >>> the most likely causes are: >>> >>> * they have not been added to the syndicate they are transcribing >>> for >>> * they have transcribed the wrong quarter >>> * they have specified the wrong year or quarter or event in the file >>> >>> Please note that files identified by this warning will not be allocated >>> to any syndicate and therefore coordinators will not be able to use >>> coordinator facilities (such as UploadReport for a particular syndicate >>> or downloading the file) for such a file. If the issue is that the >>> transcriber has not been added to the syndicate, it should be possible >>> to correct this by the transcriber uploading the file again (once the >>> transcriber has been added to the syndicate). You can use >>> http://www.freebmd.org.uk/cgi/show-file.pl to check which syndicate a >>> file has been transcribed for. >>> >>> Because of feedback received this will remain a warning rather than >>> being upgraded to an error. >>> >>> Barrie >>> >>> >>> --Certified Virus Free by 4SecureMail.com ICSA-Certified Scanner-- >>> >>> ------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >>> FREEBMD-SYNDICATES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' >>> >> without >> >>> the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> --Certified Virus Free by 4SecureMail.com ICSA-Certified Scanner-- >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> FREEBMD-SYNDICATES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' >> without >> the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> >> >> >> > > > --Certified Virus Free by 4SecureMail.com ICSA-Certified Scanner-- > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > FREEBMD-SYNDICATES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' > without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >
Jeff, The convention to put the syndicate name (or country name) in the file is one initiated with SpeedBMD and adopted by WinBMD, MacBMD and linbmd. The information is put in a comment line after the +INFO line. However, this is not part of the definition of the input format (although it has been updated to mention it) and does not exist in word processor/spreadsheet files. Since the information is a comment the system should, in principle, ignore it. However, pragmatism to the fore, we do actually use the information but only subsidiary to the formal information. Hence, the primary determination of the syndicate of a file is the syndicate(s) the user is a member of and which is (are) transcribing the quarter. The syndicate name in the file is then used in two circumstances: * If there is more than one possible syndicate from the above process * If there is no syndicate from the above process and the syndicate in the file is 'Individual' Another issue is that the name of the syndicate entered is not checked on upload (because it is a comment) and there are a number of variations, for example the recognised aliases for your syndicate (correct name Jeff Coleman Syndicate) are: Jeff Coleman Jeff Colemen jeff colman jeff.coleman jeffcoleman Jeffr Coleman Given the informality of the information and the variations it would be unwise to use it as a primary source. >From the way in which the information is used I don't think it is worth trying to get transcribers to complete the input field differently, especially since the only effective way of doing this would be to change the transcription software. Barrie On 19:59, Jeff Coleman wrote: > <div class="moz-text-flowed" style="font-family: -moz-fixed">Barrie > > In the WinBMD header, the relevant field is labelled 'Syndicate (or > country)' so some transcribers will put England, Australia etc. in > there, rather that a syndicate name. > > In such cases presumably the system has to check whether the quarter > the file belongs to is being transcribed by a syndicate on whose list > the transcriber appears. > > Is there any need to give any different advice to transcribers about > how to fill in that field? > > Jeff > > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Barrie" <freebmd@myarcher.net> > To: <freebmd-syndicates@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 5:47 PM > Subject: Re: RE: RE: Non-syndicate transcriptions > > >> Brian, >> >> The check merely indicates the problem exists; changing the check won't >> make the problem go away. The issue is, I think, whether a non-syndicate >> transcription is a problem so let me expand on what I said in my >> original posting. >> >> When a file is uploaded the system makes a decision about what syndicate >> it has been transcribed for and that syndicate (or syndicates if it is >> ambiguous) is recorded with the file. The information about the >> syndicate is used in (at least) the following ways: >> >> * The Suspect Files <http://www.freebmd.org.uk/SuspectFiles.html> >> list shows the syndicate of the file; this allows coordinators to >> see which files they need to be concerned with >> * Upload Report <http://www.freebmd.org.uk/cgi/upload-report.pl> has >> the option for the results to be dependent on the syndicate of the >> file (e.g. list only files transcribed for a particular syndicate) >> * The coordinator version of Show File >> <http://www.freebmd.org.uk/cgi/coord-show-file.pl> will allow >> coordinators to download the file if it has been transcribed for >> their syndicate >> * When the database is created the syndicate of the file is used to >> determine of there is duplication within a syndicate; an entry is >> not considered to be double keyed if both transcriptions are >> within a syndicate >> >> So it is quite important that the syndicate a file is transcribed for is >> correct. If it isn't coordinators will be put to extra work and so I >> don't understand why not having a syndicate could be considered >> acceptable. >> >> Regards >> >> Barrie >> >> On 19:59, Brian Smart wrote: >>> Hello Barrie, >>> Surely the checking system needs to be changed then the problem >>> would not >>> exist. >>> Regards >>> >>> Brian Smart >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com >>> [mailto:freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Barrie >>> Sent: 29 July 2010 00:15 >>> To: freebmd-syndicates@rootsweb.com >>> Subject: Re: RE: Non-syndicate transcriptions >>> >>> Brian, >>> >>> The clause you mention is not part of the warning; it was part of my >>> explanation of the possible causes for the warning. >>> >>> The system cannot normally differentiate between these these three >>> causes for the warning, it just knows that the file has not been marked >>> as transcribed for a syndicate. >>> >>> Barrie >>> >>> On 19:59, Brian Smart wrote: >>> >>>> Hello Barrie, >>>> Why not remove the cause: "* they have not been added to the syndicate >>>> >>> they >>> >>>> are transcribing for" from this Warning/error and then the other two >>>> possible causes can be errors. >>>> I fail to see why the fact that the person has not been added to the >>>> syndicate at the time of the upload should constitute a problem in any >>>> >>> way. >>> >>>> Regards >>>> >>>> Brian Smart >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com >>>> [mailto:freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Barrie >>>> Sent: 28 July 2010 17:08 >>>> To: freebmd-syndicates@rootsweb.com >>>> Subject: Non-syndicate transcriptions >>>> >>>> The error that caused transcriptions to erroneous get reported as >>>> _not_ >>>> being done within a user's syndicate has now been corrected. If users >>>> get the warning >>>> >>>> /You do not appear to be a member of a syndicate transcribing this >>>> quarter. Please check you have the correct Year, Quarter and Event >>>> or contact your syndicate coordinator./ >>>> >>>> the most likely causes are: >>>> >>>> * they have not been added to the syndicate they are >>>> transcribing for >>>> * they have transcribed the wrong quarter >>>> * they have specified the wrong year or quarter or event in the >>>> file >>>> >>>> Please note that files identified by this warning will not be >>>> allocated >>>> to any syndicate and therefore coordinators will not be able to use >>>> coordinator facilities (such as UploadReport for a particular >>>> syndicate >>>> or downloading the file) for such a file. If the issue is that the >>>> transcriber has not been added to the syndicate, it should be possible >>>> to correct this by the transcriber uploading the file again (once the >>>> transcriber has been added to the syndicate). You can use >>>> http://www.freebmd.org.uk/cgi/show-file.pl to check which syndicate a >>>> file has been transcribed for. >>>> >>>> Because of feedback received this will remain a warning rather than >>>> being upgraded to an error. >>>> >>>> Barrie >>>> >>>> >>>> --Certified Virus Free by 4SecureMail.com ICSA-Certified Scanner-- >>>> >>>> ------------------------------- >>>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >>>> FREEBMD-SYNDICATES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' >>>> >>> without >>> >>>> the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> --Certified Virus Free by 4SecureMail.com ICSA-Certified Scanner-- >>> >>> ------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >>> FREEBMD-SYNDICATES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' >>> without >>> the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> --Certified Virus Free by 4SecureMail.com ICSA-Certified Scanner-- >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> FREEBMD-SYNDICATES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' >> without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> > > > > </div> --Certified Virus Free by 4SecureMail.com ICSA-Certified Scanner--
Hello Barrie, Re: "The check merely indicates the problem exists; changing the check won't make the problem go away. The issue is, I think, whether a non-syndicate transcription is a problem so let me expand on what I said in my original posting." The problem exists because the checks that are performed includes one that checks if the uploaded file is one that has the transcriber signed up to a specific syndicate. If this part of the check was removed there would be no problem. Re: "* The Suspect Files <http://www.freebmd.org.uk/SuspectFiles.html> list shows the syndicate of the file; this allows coordinators to see which files they need to be concerned with" I seem to remember that the suspect files report used to indicate both syndicates before this latest change. What is the problem with that? Re: "* Upload Report <http://www.freebmd.org.uk/cgi/upload-report.pl> has the option for the results to be dependent on the syndicate of the file (e.g. list only files transcribed for a particular syndicate) While this is true, the only coordinators affected by this are those like me who do not add the person to the syndicate until they have uploaded a file. I am quite happy with that situation. Re: "* The coordinator version of Show File <http://www.freebmd.org.uk/cgi/coord-show-file.pl> will allow coordinators to download the file if it has been transcribed for their syndicate." True but again it is only coordinators like me that this affects, thus this is not a valid reason to change the system. Re: * When the database is created the syndicate of the file is used to determine of there is duplication within a syndicate; an entry is not considered to be double keyed if both transcriptions are within a syndicate This is a minor short term problem and not a reason to cause those transcribers like me who do not want the system changed. Re: "So it is quite important that the syndicate a file is transcribed for is correct. If it isn't coordinators will be put to extra work and so I don't understand why not having a syndicate could be considered acceptable." Again the coordinators affected are those like me and I am happy to accept the situation. For me the result is less work not more. Please remove this part of the checking process. Brian Smart -----Original Message----- From: freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Barrie Sent: 29 July 2010 17:48 To: freebmd-syndicates@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: RE: RE: Non-syndicate transcriptions Brian, The check merely indicates the problem exists; changing the check won't make the problem go away. The issue is, I think, whether a non-syndicate transcription is a problem so let me expand on what I said in my original posting. When a file is uploaded the system makes a decision about what syndicate it has been transcribed for and that syndicate (or syndicates if it is ambiguous) is recorded with the file. The information about the syndicate is used in (at least) the following ways: * The Suspect Files <http://www.freebmd.org.uk/SuspectFiles.html> list shows the syndicate of the file; this allows coordinators to see which files they need to be concerned with * Upload Report <http://www.freebmd.org.uk/cgi/upload-report.pl> has the option for the results to be dependent on the syndicate of the file (e.g. list only files transcribed for a particular syndicate) * The coordinator version of Show File <http://www.freebmd.org.uk/cgi/coord-show-file.pl> will allow coordinators to download the file if it has been transcribed for their syndicate * When the database is created the syndicate of the file is used to determine of there is duplication within a syndicate; an entry is not considered to be double keyed if both transcriptions are within a syndicate So it is quite important that the syndicate a file is transcribed for is correct. If it isn't coordinators will be put to extra work and so I don't understand why not having a syndicate could be considered acceptable. Regards Barrie On 19:59, Brian Smart wrote: > Hello Barrie, > Surely the checking system needs to be changed then the problem would not > exist. > Regards > > Brian Smart > > > -----Original Message----- > From: freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com > [mailto:freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Barrie > Sent: 29 July 2010 00:15 > To: freebmd-syndicates@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: RE: Non-syndicate transcriptions > > Brian, > > The clause you mention is not part of the warning; it was part of my > explanation of the possible causes for the warning. > > The system cannot normally differentiate between these these three > causes for the warning, it just knows that the file has not been marked > as transcribed for a syndicate. > > Barrie > > On 19:59, Brian Smart wrote: > >> Hello Barrie, >> Why not remove the cause: "* they have not been added to the syndicate >> > they > >> are transcribing for" from this Warning/error and then the other two >> possible causes can be errors. >> I fail to see why the fact that the person has not been added to the >> syndicate at the time of the upload should constitute a problem in any >> > way. > >> Regards >> >> Brian Smart >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com >> [mailto:freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Barrie >> Sent: 28 July 2010 17:08 >> To: freebmd-syndicates@rootsweb.com >> Subject: Non-syndicate transcriptions >> >> The error that caused transcriptions to erroneous get reported as _not_ >> being done within a user's syndicate has now been corrected. If users >> get the warning >> >> /You do not appear to be a member of a syndicate transcribing this >> quarter. Please check you have the correct Year, Quarter and Event >> or contact your syndicate coordinator./ >> >> the most likely causes are: >> >> * they have not been added to the syndicate they are transcribing for >> * they have transcribed the wrong quarter >> * they have specified the wrong year or quarter or event in the file >> >> Please note that files identified by this warning will not be allocated >> to any syndicate and therefore coordinators will not be able to use >> coordinator facilities (such as UploadReport for a particular syndicate >> or downloading the file) for such a file. If the issue is that the >> transcriber has not been added to the syndicate, it should be possible >> to correct this by the transcriber uploading the file again (once the >> transcriber has been added to the syndicate). You can use >> http://www.freebmd.org.uk/cgi/show-file.pl to check which syndicate a >> file has been transcribed for. >> >> Because of feedback received this will remain a warning rather than >> being upgraded to an error. >> >> Barrie >> >> >> --Certified Virus Free by 4SecureMail.com ICSA-Certified Scanner-- >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> FREEBMD-SYNDICATES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' >> > without > >> the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> >> >> >> >> > > --Certified Virus Free by 4SecureMail.com ICSA-Certified Scanner-- > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > FREEBMD-SYNDICATES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > > --Certified Virus Free by 4SecureMail.com ICSA-Certified Scanner-- ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to FREEBMD-SYNDICATES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message
Hello Barrie, Re: "The check merely indicates the problem exists; changing the check won't make the problem go away. The issue is, I think, whether a non-syndicate transcription is a problem so let me expand on what I said in my original posting." The problem exists because the checks that are performed includes one that checks if the uploaded file is one that has the transcriber signed up to a specific syndicate. If this part of the check was removed there would be no problem. Re: "* The Suspect Files <http://www.freebmd.org.uk/SuspectFiles.html> list shows the syndicate of the file; this allows coordinators to see which files they need to be concerned with" I seem to remember that the suspect files report used to indicate both syndicates before this latest change. What is the problem with that? Re: "* Upload Report <http://www.freebmd.org.uk/cgi/upload-report.pl> has the option for the results to be dependent on the syndicate of the file (e.g. list only files transcribed for a particular syndicate) While this is true, the only coordinators affected by this are those like me who do not add the person to the syndicate until they have uploaded a file. I am quite happy with that situation. Re: "* The coordinator version of Show File <http://www.freebmd.org.uk/cgi/coord-show-file.pl> will allow coordinators to download the file if it has been transcribed for their syndicate." True but again it is only coordinators like me that this affects, thus this is not a valid reason to change the system. Re: * When the database is created the syndicate of the file is used to determine of there is duplication within a syndicate; an entry is not considered to be double keyed if both transcriptions are within a syndicate This is a minor short term problem and not a reason to cause those transcribers like me who do not want the system changed. Re: "So it is quite important that the syndicate a file is transcribed for is correct. If it isn't coordinators will be put to extra work and so I don't understand why not having a syndicate could be considered acceptable." Again the coordinators affected are those like me and I am happy to accept the situation. For me the result is less work not more. Please remove this part of the checking process. Brian Smart -----Original Message----- From: freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Barrie Sent: 29 July 2010 17:48 To: freebmd-syndicates@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: RE: RE: Non-syndicate transcriptions Brian, The check merely indicates the problem exists; changing the check won't make the problem go away. The issue is, I think, whether a non-syndicate transcription is a problem so let me expand on what I said in my original posting. When a file is uploaded the system makes a decision about what syndicate it has been transcribed for and that syndicate (or syndicates if it is ambiguous) is recorded with the file. The information about the syndicate is used in (at least) the following ways: * The Suspect Files <http://www.freebmd.org.uk/SuspectFiles.html> list shows the syndicate of the file; this allows coordinators to see which files they need to be concerned with * Upload Report <http://www.freebmd.org.uk/cgi/upload-report.pl> has the option for the results to be dependent on the syndicate of the file (e.g. list only files transcribed for a particular syndicate) * The coordinator version of Show File <http://www.freebmd.org.uk/cgi/coord-show-file.pl> will allow coordinators to download the file if it has been transcribed for their syndicate * When the database is created the syndicate of the file is used to determine of there is duplication within a syndicate; an entry is not considered to be double keyed if both transcriptions are within a syndicate So it is quite important that the syndicate a file is transcribed for is correct. If it isn't coordinators will be put to extra work and so I don't understand why not having a syndicate could be considered acceptable. Regards Barrie On 19:59, Brian Smart wrote: > Hello Barrie, > Surely the checking system needs to be changed then the problem would not > exist. > Regards > > Brian Smart > > > -----Original Message----- > From: freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com > [mailto:freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Barrie > Sent: 29 July 2010 00:15 > To: freebmd-syndicates@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: RE: Non-syndicate transcriptions > > Brian, > > The clause you mention is not part of the warning; it was part of my > explanation of the possible causes for the warning. > > The system cannot normally differentiate between these these three > causes for the warning, it just knows that the file has not been marked > as transcribed for a syndicate. > > Barrie > > On 19:59, Brian Smart wrote: > >> Hello Barrie, >> Why not remove the cause: "* they have not been added to the syndicate >> > they > >> are transcribing for" from this Warning/error and then the other two >> possible causes can be errors. >> I fail to see why the fact that the person has not been added to the >> syndicate at the time of the upload should constitute a problem in any >> > way. > >> Regards >> >> Brian Smart >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com >> [mailto:freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Barrie >> Sent: 28 July 2010 17:08 >> To: freebmd-syndicates@rootsweb.com >> Subject: Non-syndicate transcriptions >> >> The error that caused transcriptions to erroneous get reported as _not_ >> being done within a user's syndicate has now been corrected. If users >> get the warning >> >> /You do not appear to be a member of a syndicate transcribing this >> quarter. Please check you have the correct Year, Quarter and Event >> or contact your syndicate coordinator./ >> >> the most likely causes are: >> >> * they have not been added to the syndicate they are transcribing for >> * they have transcribed the wrong quarter >> * they have specified the wrong year or quarter or event in the file >> >> Please note that files identified by this warning will not be allocated >> to any syndicate and therefore coordinators will not be able to use >> coordinator facilities (such as UploadReport for a particular syndicate >> or downloading the file) for such a file. If the issue is that the >> transcriber has not been added to the syndicate, it should be possible >> to correct this by the transcriber uploading the file again (once the >> transcriber has been added to the syndicate). You can use >> http://www.freebmd.org.uk/cgi/show-file.pl to check which syndicate a >> file has been transcribed for. >> >> Because of feedback received this will remain a warning rather than >> being upgraded to an error. >> >> Barrie >> >> >> --Certified Virus Free by 4SecureMail.com ICSA-Certified Scanner-- >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> FREEBMD-SYNDICATES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' >> > without > >> the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> >> >> >> >> > > --Certified Virus Free by 4SecureMail.com ICSA-Certified Scanner-- > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > FREEBMD-SYNDICATES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > > --Certified Virus Free by 4SecureMail.com ICSA-Certified Scanner-- ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to FREEBMD-SYNDICATES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message
Brian, You seem to be under the misapprehension that there are several checks; you said: The problem exists because the checks that are performed includes one that checks if the uploaded file is one that has the transcriber signed up to a specific syndicate. If this part of the check was removed there would be no problem. In fact there is only _one_ check which is that the transcriber is a member of a syndicate transcribing the quarter. Failing this single check can be caused by: * transcribers not having been added to the syndicate they are transcribing for o because the coordinator has forgotten to add them o because they are not added until they have done their first transcription * transcribers transcribing the wrong quarter * transcribers specifying the wrong year or quarter or event in the file A short while ago I did a check on syndicate membership and found hundreds of instances of transcriptions that erroneously had no syndicate because the coordinator had forgotten to add the transcriber to their syndicate (you had one such transcriber who I notified you about). Such transcriptions would be incorrectly handled in the instances I gave in my previous posting, affecting _all_ coordinators and the system. It took a good deal of work to sort out (indeed it is still ongoing) and it is important that we do what we can to avoid getting into the same situation again by preventing the error at source. You complain that this check results in more work for you, but all you have to do is instruct your new transcribers to ignore the warning on their first upload. Barrie On 19:59, Brian Smart wrote: > Hello Barrie, > Re: > "The check merely indicates the problem exists; changing the check won't > make the problem go away. The issue is, I think, whether a non-syndicate > transcription is a problem so let me expand on what I said in my > original posting." > > The problem exists because the checks that are performed includes one that > checks if the uploaded file is one that has the transcriber signed up to a > specific syndicate. If this part of the check was removed there would be no > problem. > > > Re: > "* The Suspect Files <http://www.freebmd.org.uk/SuspectFiles.html> > list shows the syndicate of the file; this allows coordinators to > see which files they need to be concerned with" > > I seem to remember that the suspect files report used to indicate both > syndicates before this latest change. What is the problem with that? > > Re: > "* Upload Report <http://www.freebmd.org.uk/cgi/upload-report.pl> has > the option for the results to be dependent on the syndicate of the > file (e.g. list only files transcribed for a particular syndicate) > > While this is true, the only coordinators affected by this are those like me > who do not add the person to the syndicate until they have uploaded a file. > I am quite happy with that situation. > > > Re: > "* The coordinator version of Show File > <http://www.freebmd.org.uk/cgi/coord-show-file.pl> will allow > coordinators to download the file if it has been transcribed for > their syndicate." > > > True but again it is only coordinators like me that this affects, thus this > is not a valid reason to change the system. > > > Re: > * When the database is created the syndicate of the file is used to > determine of there is duplication within a syndicate; an entry is > not considered to be double keyed if both transcriptions are > within a syndicate > > This is a minor short term problem and not a reason to cause those > transcribers like me who do not want the system changed. > > > Re: > > "So it is quite important that the syndicate a file is transcribed for is > correct. If it isn't coordinators will be put to extra work and so I > don't understand why not having a syndicate could be considered acceptable." > > > Again the coordinators affected are those like me and I am happy to accept > the situation. For me the result is less work not more. > > > Please remove this part of the checking process. > > Brian Smart > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com > [mailto:freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Barrie > Sent: 29 July 2010 17:48 > To: freebmd-syndicates@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: RE: RE: Non-syndicate transcriptions > > Brian, > > The check merely indicates the problem exists; changing the check won't > make the problem go away. The issue is, I think, whether a non-syndicate > transcription is a problem so let me expand on what I said in my > original posting. > > When a file is uploaded the system makes a decision about what syndicate > it has been transcribed for and that syndicate (or syndicates if it is > ambiguous) is recorded with the file. The information about the > syndicate is used in (at least) the following ways: > > * The Suspect Files <http://www.freebmd.org.uk/SuspectFiles.html> > list shows the syndicate of the file; this allows coordinators to > see which files they need to be concerned with > * Upload Report <http://www.freebmd.org.uk/cgi/upload-report.pl> has > the option for the results to be dependent on the syndicate of the > file (e.g. list only files transcribed for a particular syndicate) > * The coordinator version of Show File > <http://www.freebmd.org.uk/cgi/coord-show-file.pl> will allow > coordinators to download the file if it has been transcribed for > their syndicate > * When the database is created the syndicate of the file is used to > determine of there is duplication within a syndicate; an entry is > not considered to be double keyed if both transcriptions are > within a syndicate > > So it is quite important that the syndicate a file is transcribed for is > correct. If it isn't coordinators will be put to extra work and so I > don't understand why not having a syndicate could be considered acceptable. > > Regards > > Barrie > > On 19:59, Brian Smart wrote: > >> Hello Barrie, >> Surely the checking system needs to be changed then the problem would not >> exist. >> Regards >> >> Brian Smart >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com >> [mailto:freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Barrie >> Sent: 29 July 2010 00:15 >> To: freebmd-syndicates@rootsweb.com >> Subject: Re: RE: Non-syndicate transcriptions >> >> Brian, >> >> The clause you mention is not part of the warning; it was part of my >> explanation of the possible causes for the warning. >> >> The system cannot normally differentiate between these these three >> causes for the warning, it just knows that the file has not been marked >> as transcribed for a syndicate. >> >> Barrie >> >> On 19:59, Brian Smart wrote: >> >> >>> Hello Barrie, >>> Why not remove the cause: "* they have not been added to the syndicate >>> >>> >> they >> >> >>> are transcribing for" from this Warning/error and then the other two >>> possible causes can be errors. >>> I fail to see why the fact that the person has not been added to the >>> syndicate at the time of the upload should constitute a problem in any >>> >>> >> way. >> >> >>> Regards >>> >>> Brian Smart >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com >>> [mailto:freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Barrie >>> Sent: 28 July 2010 17:08 >>> To: freebmd-syndicates@rootsweb.com >>> Subject: Non-syndicate transcriptions >>> >>> The error that caused transcriptions to erroneous get reported as _not_ >>> being done within a user's syndicate has now been corrected. If users >>> get the warning >>> >>> /You do not appear to be a member of a syndicate transcribing this >>> quarter. Please check you have the correct Year, Quarter and Event >>> or contact your syndicate coordinator./ >>> >>> the most likely causes are: >>> >>> * they have not been added to the syndicate they are transcribing for >>> * they have transcribed the wrong quarter >>> * they have specified the wrong year or quarter or event in the file >>> >>> Please note that files identified by this warning will not be allocated >>> to any syndicate and therefore coordinators will not be able to use >>> coordinator facilities (such as UploadReport for a particular syndicate >>> or downloading the file) for such a file. If the issue is that the >>> transcriber has not been added to the syndicate, it should be possible >>> to correct this by the transcriber uploading the file again (once the >>> transcriber has been added to the syndicate). You can use >>> http://www.freebmd.org.uk/cgi/show-file.pl to check which syndicate a >>> file has been transcribed for. >>> >>> Because of feedback received this will remain a warning rather than >>> being upgraded to an error. >>> >>> Barrie >>> >>> >>> --Certified Virus Free by 4SecureMail.com ICSA-Certified Scanner-- >>> >>> ------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >>> FREEBMD-SYNDICATES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' >>> >>> >> without >> >> >>> the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> --Certified Virus Free by 4SecureMail.com ICSA-Certified Scanner-- >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> FREEBMD-SYNDICATES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' >> > without > >> the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> >> >> >> >> > > > --Certified Virus Free by 4SecureMail.com ICSA-Certified Scanner-- > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > FREEBMD-SYNDICATES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > > --Certified Virus Free by 4SecureMail.com ICSA-Certified Scanner--
Hello Barrie, All file headers include an email address that can be checked to find the relevant syndicate. From this you can send an email to the associated coordinator advising the problem. All this can be automated so only the relevant coordinator has to take action. This overcomes all of your concerns. Brian Smart -----Original Message----- From: freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Barrie Sent: 01 August 2010 00:36 To: freebmd-syndicates@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: RE: RE: RE: Non-syndicate transcriptions Brian, You seem to be under the misapprehension that there are several checks; you said: The problem exists because the checks that are performed includes one that checks if the uploaded file is one that has the transcriber signed up to a specific syndicate. If this part of the check was removed there would be no problem. In fact there is only _one_ check which is that the transcriber is a member of a syndicate transcribing the quarter. Failing this single check can be caused by: * transcribers not having been added to the syndicate they are transcribing for o because the coordinator has forgotten to add them o because they are not added until they have done their first transcription * transcribers transcribing the wrong quarter * transcribers specifying the wrong year or quarter or event in the file A short while ago I did a check on syndicate membership and found hundreds of instances of transcriptions that erroneously had no syndicate because the coordinator had forgotten to add the transcriber to their syndicate (you had one such transcriber who I notified you about). Such transcriptions would be incorrectly handled in the instances I gave in my previous posting, affecting _all_ coordinators and the system. It took a good deal of work to sort out (indeed it is still ongoing) and it is important that we do what we can to avoid getting into the same situation again by preventing the error at source. You complain that this check results in more work for you, but all you have to do is instruct your new transcribers to ignore the warning on their first upload. Barrie On 19:59, Brian Smart wrote: > Hello Barrie, > Re: > "The check merely indicates the problem exists; changing the check won't > make the problem go away. The issue is, I think, whether a non-syndicate > transcription is a problem so let me expand on what I said in my > original posting." > > The problem exists because the checks that are performed includes one that > checks if the uploaded file is one that has the transcriber signed up to a > specific syndicate. If this part of the check was removed there would be no > problem. > > > Re: > "* The Suspect Files <http://www.freebmd.org.uk/SuspectFiles.html> > list shows the syndicate of the file; this allows coordinators to > see which files they need to be concerned with" > > I seem to remember that the suspect files report used to indicate both > syndicates before this latest change. What is the problem with that? > > Re: > "* Upload Report <http://www.freebmd.org.uk/cgi/upload-report.pl> has > the option for the results to be dependent on the syndicate of the > file (e.g. list only files transcribed for a particular syndicate) > > While this is true, the only coordinators affected by this are those like me > who do not add the person to the syndicate until they have uploaded a file. > I am quite happy with that situation. > > > Re: > "* The coordinator version of Show File > <http://www.freebmd.org.uk/cgi/coord-show-file.pl> will allow > coordinators to download the file if it has been transcribed for > their syndicate." > > > True but again it is only coordinators like me that this affects, thus this > is not a valid reason to change the system. > > > Re: > * When the database is created the syndicate of the file is used to > determine of there is duplication within a syndicate; an entry is > not considered to be double keyed if both transcriptions are > within a syndicate > > This is a minor short term problem and not a reason to cause those > transcribers like me who do not want the system changed. > > > Re: > > "So it is quite important that the syndicate a file is transcribed for is > correct. If it isn't coordinators will be put to extra work and so I > don't understand why not having a syndicate could be considered acceptable." > > > Again the coordinators affected are those like me and I am happy to accept > the situation. For me the result is less work not more. > > > Please remove this part of the checking process. > > Brian Smart > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com > [mailto:freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Barrie > Sent: 29 July 2010 17:48 > To: freebmd-syndicates@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: RE: RE: Non-syndicate transcriptions > > Brian, > > The check merely indicates the problem exists; changing the check won't > make the problem go away. The issue is, I think, whether a non-syndicate > transcription is a problem so let me expand on what I said in my > original posting. > > When a file is uploaded the system makes a decision about what syndicate > it has been transcribed for and that syndicate (or syndicates if it is > ambiguous) is recorded with the file. The information about the > syndicate is used in (at least) the following ways: > > * The Suspect Files <http://www.freebmd.org.uk/SuspectFiles.html> > list shows the syndicate of the file; this allows coordinators to > see which files they need to be concerned with > * Upload Report <http://www.freebmd.org.uk/cgi/upload-report.pl> has > the option for the results to be dependent on the syndicate of the > file (e.g. list only files transcribed for a particular syndicate) > * The coordinator version of Show File > <http://www.freebmd.org.uk/cgi/coord-show-file.pl> will allow > coordinators to download the file if it has been transcribed for > their syndicate > * When the database is created the syndicate of the file is used to > determine of there is duplication within a syndicate; an entry is > not considered to be double keyed if both transcriptions are > within a syndicate > > So it is quite important that the syndicate a file is transcribed for is > correct. If it isn't coordinators will be put to extra work and so I > don't understand why not having a syndicate could be considered acceptable. > > Regards > > Barrie > > On 19:59, Brian Smart wrote: > >> Hello Barrie, >> Surely the checking system needs to be changed then the problem would not >> exist. >> Regards >> >> Brian Smart >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com >> [mailto:freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Barrie >> Sent: 29 July 2010 00:15 >> To: freebmd-syndicates@rootsweb.com >> Subject: Re: RE: Non-syndicate transcriptions >> >> Brian, >> >> The clause you mention is not part of the warning; it was part of my >> explanation of the possible causes for the warning. >> >> The system cannot normally differentiate between these these three >> causes for the warning, it just knows that the file has not been marked >> as transcribed for a syndicate. >> >> Barrie >> >> On 19:59, Brian Smart wrote: >> >> >>> Hello Barrie, >>> Why not remove the cause: "* they have not been added to the syndicate >>> >>> >> they >> >> >>> are transcribing for" from this Warning/error and then the other two >>> possible causes can be errors. >>> I fail to see why the fact that the person has not been added to the >>> syndicate at the time of the upload should constitute a problem in any >>> >>> >> way. >> >> >>> Regards >>> >>> Brian Smart >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com >>> [mailto:freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Barrie >>> Sent: 28 July 2010 17:08 >>> To: freebmd-syndicates@rootsweb.com >>> Subject: Non-syndicate transcriptions >>> >>> The error that caused transcriptions to erroneous get reported as _not_ >>> being done within a user's syndicate has now been corrected. If users >>> get the warning >>> >>> /You do not appear to be a member of a syndicate transcribing this >>> quarter. Please check you have the correct Year, Quarter and Event >>> or contact your syndicate coordinator./ >>> >>> the most likely causes are: >>> >>> * they have not been added to the syndicate they are transcribing for >>> * they have transcribed the wrong quarter >>> * they have specified the wrong year or quarter or event in the file >>> >>> Please note that files identified by this warning will not be allocated >>> to any syndicate and therefore coordinators will not be able to use >>> coordinator facilities (such as UploadReport for a particular syndicate >>> or downloading the file) for such a file. If the issue is that the >>> transcriber has not been added to the syndicate, it should be possible >>> to correct this by the transcriber uploading the file again (once the >>> transcriber has been added to the syndicate). You can use >>> http://www.freebmd.org.uk/cgi/show-file.pl to check which syndicate a >>> file has been transcribed for. >>> >>> Because of feedback received this will remain a warning rather than >>> being upgraded to an error. >>> >>> Barrie >>> >>> >>> --Certified Virus Free by 4SecureMail.com ICSA-Certified Scanner-- >>> >>> ------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >>> FREEBMD-SYNDICATES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' >>> >>> >> without >> >> >>> the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> --Certified Virus Free by 4SecureMail.com ICSA-Certified Scanner-- >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> FREEBMD-SYNDICATES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' >> > without > >> the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> >> >> >> >> > > > --Certified Virus Free by 4SecureMail.com ICSA-Certified Scanner-- > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > FREEBMD-SYNDICATES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > > --Certified Virus Free by 4SecureMail.com ICSA-Certified Scanner-- ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to FREEBMD-SYNDICATES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message
Hello Barrie, All file headers include an email address that can be checked to find the relevant syndicate. From this you can send an email to the associated coordinator advising the problem. All this can be automated so only the relevant coordinator has to take action. This overcomes all of your concerns. Brian Smart -----Original Message----- From: freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Barrie Sent: 01 August 2010 00:36 To: freebmd-syndicates@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: RE: RE: RE: Non-syndicate transcriptions Brian, You seem to be under the misapprehension that there are several checks; you said: The problem exists because the checks that are performed includes one that checks if the uploaded file is one that has the transcriber signed up to a specific syndicate. If this part of the check was removed there would be no problem. In fact there is only _one_ check which is that the transcriber is a member of a syndicate transcribing the quarter. Failing this single check can be caused by: * transcribers not having been added to the syndicate they are transcribing for o because the coordinator has forgotten to add them o because they are not added until they have done their first transcription * transcribers transcribing the wrong quarter * transcribers specifying the wrong year or quarter or event in the file A short while ago I did a check on syndicate membership and found hundreds of instances of transcriptions that erroneously had no syndicate because the coordinator had forgotten to add the transcriber to their syndicate (you had one such transcriber who I notified you about). Such transcriptions would be incorrectly handled in the instances I gave in my previous posting, affecting _all_ coordinators and the system. It took a good deal of work to sort out (indeed it is still ongoing) and it is important that we do what we can to avoid getting into the same situation again by preventing the error at source. You complain that this check results in more work for you, but all you have to do is instruct your new transcribers to ignore the warning on their first upload. Barrie On 19:59, Brian Smart wrote: > Hello Barrie, > Re: > "The check merely indicates the problem exists; changing the check won't > make the problem go away. The issue is, I think, whether a non-syndicate > transcription is a problem so let me expand on what I said in my > original posting." > > The problem exists because the checks that are performed includes one that > checks if the uploaded file is one that has the transcriber signed up to a > specific syndicate. If this part of the check was removed there would be no > problem. > > > Re: > "* The Suspect Files <http://www.freebmd.org.uk/SuspectFiles.html> > list shows the syndicate of the file; this allows coordinators to > see which files they need to be concerned with" > > I seem to remember that the suspect files report used to indicate both > syndicates before this latest change. What is the problem with that? > > Re: > "* Upload Report <http://www.freebmd.org.uk/cgi/upload-report.pl> has > the option for the results to be dependent on the syndicate of the > file (e.g. list only files transcribed for a particular syndicate) > > While this is true, the only coordinators affected by this are those like me > who do not add the person to the syndicate until they have uploaded a file. > I am quite happy with that situation. > > > Re: > "* The coordinator version of Show File > <http://www.freebmd.org.uk/cgi/coord-show-file.pl> will allow > coordinators to download the file if it has been transcribed for > their syndicate." > > > True but again it is only coordinators like me that this affects, thus this > is not a valid reason to change the system. > > > Re: > * When the database is created the syndicate of the file is used to > determine of there is duplication within a syndicate; an entry is > not considered to be double keyed if both transcriptions are > within a syndicate > > This is a minor short term problem and not a reason to cause those > transcribers like me who do not want the system changed. > > > Re: > > "So it is quite important that the syndicate a file is transcribed for is > correct. If it isn't coordinators will be put to extra work and so I > don't understand why not having a syndicate could be considered acceptable." > > > Again the coordinators affected are those like me and I am happy to accept > the situation. For me the result is less work not more. > > > Please remove this part of the checking process. > > Brian Smart > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com > [mailto:freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Barrie > Sent: 29 July 2010 17:48 > To: freebmd-syndicates@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: RE: RE: Non-syndicate transcriptions > > Brian, > > The check merely indicates the problem exists; changing the check won't > make the problem go away. The issue is, I think, whether a non-syndicate > transcription is a problem so let me expand on what I said in my > original posting. > > When a file is uploaded the system makes a decision about what syndicate > it has been transcribed for and that syndicate (or syndicates if it is > ambiguous) is recorded with the file. The information about the > syndicate is used in (at least) the following ways: > > * The Suspect Files <http://www.freebmd.org.uk/SuspectFiles.html> > list shows the syndicate of the file; this allows coordinators to > see which files they need to be concerned with > * Upload Report <http://www.freebmd.org.uk/cgi/upload-report.pl> has > the option for the results to be dependent on the syndicate of the > file (e.g. list only files transcribed for a particular syndicate) > * The coordinator version of Show File > <http://www.freebmd.org.uk/cgi/coord-show-file.pl> will allow > coordinators to download the file if it has been transcribed for > their syndicate > * When the database is created the syndicate of the file is used to > determine of there is duplication within a syndicate; an entry is > not considered to be double keyed if both transcriptions are > within a syndicate > > So it is quite important that the syndicate a file is transcribed for is > correct. If it isn't coordinators will be put to extra work and so I > don't understand why not having a syndicate could be considered acceptable. > > Regards > > Barrie > > On 19:59, Brian Smart wrote: > >> Hello Barrie, >> Surely the checking system needs to be changed then the problem would not >> exist. >> Regards >> >> Brian Smart >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com >> [mailto:freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Barrie >> Sent: 29 July 2010 00:15 >> To: freebmd-syndicates@rootsweb.com >> Subject: Re: RE: Non-syndicate transcriptions >> >> Brian, >> >> The clause you mention is not part of the warning; it was part of my >> explanation of the possible causes for the warning. >> >> The system cannot normally differentiate between these these three >> causes for the warning, it just knows that the file has not been marked >> as transcribed for a syndicate. >> >> Barrie >> >> On 19:59, Brian Smart wrote: >> >> >>> Hello Barrie, >>> Why not remove the cause: "* they have not been added to the syndicate >>> >>> >> they >> >> >>> are transcribing for" from this Warning/error and then the other two >>> possible causes can be errors. >>> I fail to see why the fact that the person has not been added to the >>> syndicate at the time of the upload should constitute a problem in any >>> >>> >> way. >> >> >>> Regards >>> >>> Brian Smart >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com >>> [mailto:freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Barrie >>> Sent: 28 July 2010 17:08 >>> To: freebmd-syndicates@rootsweb.com >>> Subject: Non-syndicate transcriptions >>> >>> The error that caused transcriptions to erroneous get reported as _not_ >>> being done within a user's syndicate has now been corrected. If users >>> get the warning >>> >>> /You do not appear to be a member of a syndicate transcribing this >>> quarter. Please check you have the correct Year, Quarter and Event >>> or contact your syndicate coordinator./ >>> >>> the most likely causes are: >>> >>> * they have not been added to the syndicate they are transcribing for >>> * they have transcribed the wrong quarter >>> * they have specified the wrong year or quarter or event in the file >>> >>> Please note that files identified by this warning will not be allocated >>> to any syndicate and therefore coordinators will not be able to use >>> coordinator facilities (such as UploadReport for a particular syndicate >>> or downloading the file) for such a file. If the issue is that the >>> transcriber has not been added to the syndicate, it should be possible >>> to correct this by the transcriber uploading the file again (once the >>> transcriber has been added to the syndicate). You can use >>> http://www.freebmd.org.uk/cgi/show-file.pl to check which syndicate a >>> file has been transcribed for. >>> >>> Because of feedback received this will remain a warning rather than >>> being upgraded to an error. >>> >>> Barrie >>> >>> >>> --Certified Virus Free by 4SecureMail.com ICSA-Certified Scanner-- >>> >>> ------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >>> FREEBMD-SYNDICATES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' >>> >>> >> without >> >> >>> the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> --Certified Virus Free by 4SecureMail.com ICSA-Certified Scanner-- >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> FREEBMD-SYNDICATES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' >> > without > >> the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> >> >> >> >> > > > --Certified Virus Free by 4SecureMail.com ICSA-Certified Scanner-- > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > FREEBMD-SYNDICATES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > > --Certified Virus Free by 4SecureMail.com ICSA-Certified Scanner-- ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to FREEBMD-SYNDICATES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message