 |
 |
Yeah, I am beginning to wonder, based on these really helpful replies, if I need to scale back to what is "doable" and "reasonable." And reassess ParsCit. Thanks to all for this additional information. Steve On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 4:18 PM, Nate Vack <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 3:57 PM, Steve Oberg <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > > > I fully realize how much of a risk that is in terms of reliability and > > maintenance. But right now I just want a way to do this in bulk with a > high > > level of accuracy. > > How bad is it, really, if you get some (5%?) bad requests into your > document delivery system? Customers submit poor quality requests by > hand with some frequency, last I checked... > > Especially if you can hack your system to deliver the original > citation all the way into your doc delivery system, you may be able to > make the case that 'this is a good service to offer; let's just deal > with the bad parses manually.' > > Trying to solve this via pure technology is gonna get into a world of > diminishing returns. A surprising number of citations in references > sections are wrong. Some correct citations are really hard to parse, > even by humans who look at a lot of citations. > > ParsCit has, in my limited testing, worked as well as anything I've > seen (commercial or OSS), and much better than most. > > My $0.02, > -Nate >