[alt-photo] Re: casein+ alt to dichromate

[Peter Friedrichsen]

Alberto,

Yes we are looking at the same document. Here is the mystery solved:

In this patent, on line 25 of the "Provisional Specification" it is 
quoted as methylic violet as you and Christina have pointed out, 
however if you go to the "Complete Specifications" paragraph, you 
will find "metallic violet quoted on line 29.

They must have copied from the same erroneous document in order to 
pass that same error to two patents.

Well I think I have burned up enough time on this academic exercise. 
I am baking copper in an oven and its ready for serving.

Peter

At 03:15 PM 23/06/2012, you wrote:
>Peter,
>>Curiosity got the best of me so I had to double check this. From 
>>Espacanet, the origianl GB pdf specifies metallic violet, while if 
>>you read that section as electronic text by clicking on 
>>"Description", it specifies methylic violet. The only reason I can 
>>think of is that there is a corrected document that was OCR'd but 
>>the uncorrected version has been scanned and made available when 
>>clicking on "Original Document" Perhaps your access route gave you 
>>the corrected one.
>
>Are we looking at the same pages?
> From Espacenet, both pdf (scan of the original) and from 
> "Description", the GB patent reports "methylic violet".
>original (links are all in a row):
>http://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/description?CC=GB&NR=19072 
>0740A&KC=A&FT=D&ND=3&date=19080618&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP
>description:
>http://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/originalDocument?CC=GB&NR= 
>190720740A&KC=A&FT=D&ND=3&date=19080618&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP
>The US patent can be retrieved in pdf only (no "description" 
>available), and there is "metallic".
>Alberto
>www.grupponamias.com
>www.alternativephotography.com/wp/photographers/rodolfo-namias-group
>_______________________________________________
>Alt-photo-process-list | http://altphotolist.org/listinfo