Was that you I responded to on the other thread? I thought it was Jh4freedom. As near as I can tell, you two are among the more civil of the non-birthers.
Regarding OCR, (Optical character recognition), I cannot comprehend how something which is designed to recognize characters (a useless function when making a copy of something) should alter the characters. OCR was originally developed to convert scanned images of text into ASCII text. Why it would want to create and then tamper with color-bit-mapped output characters makes no sense.
I've read the theory that some software relies on the creation of "tokens" which are represented by the best example of the Character. If it should be that OCR decided to manipulate the data, consistency would require that it do the same with every upper case "R" on the document. All of them should be represented by a 4 times lower resolution pixel map with a bit depth of at least 8. (256 distinct levels of brightness) I will quickly examine the document for another upper case "R." (Imagine Jeapordy music playing now. :) )
There is another capital "R" in the second iteration of the word "BARACK" later in the document. It is distinctly different from the peculiar "R" in the first iteration of "BARACK." It shows no signs of being a different resolution or bit depth.
Either the OCR didn't recognize it as the same character, or it didn't behave consistently. If there *IS* a theory of software that explains this, I would like to hear it.
Thanks. Like you, I'll meet civility with civility.
I cannot comprehend how something which is designed to recognize characters (a useless function when making a copy of something)
Not so useless if you were making an electronic copy of something you later wanted to search for by text within it. Scanners for document archiving can add an invisible text layer to a PDF document for that purpose. It's possible that feature was on by default in whatever software was used to scan the BC, even though in this case it wouldn't be needed (and would have saved a lot of trouble if it had been turned off). Again, without knowing what scanner and software were used, and how, this has to be just speculation.
Either the OCR didn't recognize it as the same character, or it didn't behave consistently. If there *IS* a theory of software that explains this, I would like to hear it.
The answer would be (I think) that the OCR didn't recognize the first 'R' as an R, and so left it part of the background--i.e., it didn't try to extract and "read" it--probably because it was more gray than black. In the second instance, though, it grouped it with the text rather than with the background.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
FACT: IT IS A SIMPLE MATTER TO PROVE ONE”S NATURAL BORN CITIZENSHIP IN A PROMPT AND STRAIGHT FORWARD MANNER USING THE VERY BEST, CERTIFIABLE, and CERTIFIED EVIDENCE! ( Yeah! I am shouting!)
Fact: Obama posted crap! (and I believe you know that).