Apparently your customers are more, er, particular with their data
than I've experienced.

On Dec 2, 2:54 pm, Tom Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'd be interested in what the 70 checks were because i tend to built
> in centrally validation and formatting routines to the core codebase i
> built feeds from.
>
> UPC is never something that i overly verify mainly because i leave it
> up to my customers to provide valid data. They get data mainly
> directly from the manufacturer/supplier and for anything else i have a
> UPC search tool that queries Google Base data they can use to do some
> research.
>
> Tom Wilson
> Freelance Google Base Developer and Consultantwww.tomthedeveloper.com
>
> Google Base Tools -http://dev.tomthedeveloper.com/googlebase
> Featured Project 
> :http://google-code-featured.blogspot.com/2008/02/google-base-competit...
>
> On Dec 2, 5:53 pm, icebackhaz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Ah well I would validate on receipt from our client, for whom we have
> > the responsibility to produce good listings.  Then once the data is in
> > my control, I can send to google secure in the knowledge that it will
> > be acceptable.  I see no advantage in just sending stuff up then
> > groping through a typically bad web UI to edit errant values.  Simply
> > doesn't scale.
>
> > On Dec 1, 9:19 pm, Celebird <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > i bothered implementing a modified luhn
> > > before the google-base quality feature --
> > > so now i feel i've wasted the effort.
>
> > > but since the ~70 other validation checks take
> > > under a few minutes per 50,000 items they can
> > > sometimes save time when typos are an issue.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Google Base Data API" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Base-data-API?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to