Re: 76-Contest Ballot Reformatted

From: charlie strauss <cems_at_earthlink_dot_net>
Date: Sat Jun 05 2004 - 17:17:22 CDT

-----Original Message-----
From: Arthur Keller <arthur_at_kellers_dot_org>

>>My overall feeling is that for machine reading, if it is to be
>>robust enought for elections, that in the end it may not matter if
>>its OCR-A or times font. And times is much more eye pleasing.

>Whoa! OCR-A is machine readable. Times is not reliably machine readable.
>It's like saying, if they are both fast sports cars, it doesn't
>matter if you drive a Ferrari or a Yugo.
>Maybe you should study the theory of counterfactuals.

Perhaps I was insuffciently clear. I was speaking in the context of my previous speculation that standard character recognition was in my guess going to be satisfactoraly fast, accurate or robust in the field for an election system. My speculation was that it was going to be neccessary to recognize whole images of expected text from a small pallete of allowed answers in which case whether one uses Times or OCR is going to be relativeely moot. By the way i'd say your response was a good example of a "strawman argument" :-)
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain
Received on Wed Jun 30 23:17:08 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Jun 30 2004 - 23:17:29 CDT