On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 21:51:57 +1100, you wrote: >One of my Syndicate members recently received a corrections request. The >source cited for the correction was 1837online.com. >Since we are not allowed to use this source for transcription why does >the same rule not extend to using it for verification? The cited source is merely used as a sense filter to determine whether we are dealing with a correction request that has actually been properly researched by the submitter from the GRO index, or one of the MANY "idiot corrections" with stated sources such as "she was my grandmother". Regardless of the source quoted by the submitter, it is for the transcriber to go back to *their* source and check whether the correction is indeed accurate. They should not accept the correction request as gospel. Any question of copyright infringement which might arise is, in any case, covered by the "fair use" provisions of the Copyright Designs and Patents Act in respect of individual corrections (but NOT transcribing whole pages). -- Dave Mayall

> On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 21:51:57 +1100, you wrote: > >>One of my Syndicate members recently received a corrections request. The >>source cited for the correction was 1837online.com. >>Since we are not allowed to use this source for transcription why does >>the same rule not extend to using it for verification? > > The cited source is merely used as a sense filter to determine whether > we are dealing with a correction request that has actually been > properly researched by the submitter from the GRO index, or one of the > MANY "idiot corrections" with stated sources such as "she was my > grandmother". > > Regardless of the source quoted by the submitter, it is for the > transcriber to go back to *their* source and check whether the > correction is indeed accurate. They should not accept the correction > request as gospel. > > Any question of copyright infringement which might arise is, in any > case, covered by the "fair use" provisions of the Copyright Designs > and Patents Act in respect of individual corrections (but NOT > transcribing whole pages). > On 7th November 2004 I posted to this list information that one of my transcribers and I had established that 1837online image evidence is not always superior to our scans. It appears that some part of the process producing their images has a 'digital enhancement' effect that can sometimes mean that numbers are rendered incorrectly - for example a real 3 can appear as an 8. I repeat Dave's advice > Regardless of the source quoted by the submitter, it is for the > transcriber to go back to *their* source and check whether the > correction is indeed accurate. They should not accept the correction > request as gospel. Bear in mind that the index we are transcribing also contains errors. Not long ago I looked at a marriage entry in a parish register where according the Index one party married in Pontardawe and the other in Pontypridd!! Jeff -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.8.5 - Release Date: 03/02/2005