Microsoft

Sean Flynn

My feedback

  1. 7 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    3 comments  ·  Form Recognizer  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Sean Flynn supported this idea  · 
  2. 2 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Form Recognizer  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Sean Flynn supported this idea  · 
  3. 8 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Planned  ·  4 comments  ·  Form Recognizer  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Sean Flynn commented  · 

    So here we are at the end of July and there is still no mention of V2 container support. Looking at some of the new July features of BYOK and private end points it seems to me that you guys are going to abandon the idea of local container support. I'm fine with that but you just need to state that or come out with a date of when you are going to have V2 container support.

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Sean Flynn commented  · 

    So the the V2 Azure service is available now in preview but not the container. We want to be able to run on premise so this is quite important to us. Does anyone have a roadmap for this product? I haven't seen anything online indicating the status of the Form Recognizer product.

    Sean Flynn supported this idea  · 
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Sean Flynn commented  · 

    Is there a reason why the container cannot be provided as part of the preview? I would assume you would want to test this prior to the general release. If you are not providing it in preview does that mean the container version will not be available at GA?

  4. 3 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    2 comments  ·  Form Recognizer  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Sean Flynn shared this idea  · 
  5. 1 vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Form Recognizer  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Sean Flynn shared this idea  · 
  6. 1 vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Form Recognizer  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Sean Flynn shared this idea  · 
  7. 8 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Planned  ·  0 comments  ·  Form Recognizer  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Sean Flynn shared this idea  · 
  8. 11 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    6 comments  ·  Form Recognizer  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Sean Flynn commented  · 

    I have a use case where each page of a PDF could be a different form so this feature would be cool if it could deduce which model to use on the fly for each page.

    Sean Flynn supported this idea  · 
  9. 1 vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    2 comments  ·  Form Recognizer  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Sean Flynn commented  · 

    It's just a coordinate system so all you have to do is calculate the deltas for the width/height and multiply the result for the area. I would not want to increase the size of the response for such a simple calculation.

  10. 1 vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    1 comment  ·  Form Recognizer  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Sean Flynn commented  · 

    One of the things I found was that the Form Recognizer maintains a ".vott" file in the blob storage. I'm not sure what this is for but it's a json file and it has an array named "tags" that lists all of the fields in display order which for me was what I wanted.

    Sean Flynn shared this idea  · 
  11. 12 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    3 comments  ·  Form Recognizer  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Sean Flynn supported this idea  · 
  12. 8 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    1 comment  ·  Form Recognizer  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Sean Flynn commented  · 

    This is enormously complex to implement. I assume you want to do this for a particular field on a form. The question is what weighting do you give the new training? Does it replace all previous training for that field? Does it simply "average" it into the rest of the training? That said it would be a really cool feature but I'm just not sure how you're going to implement it.

    Sean Flynn supported this idea  · 
  13. 1 vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    1 comment  ·  Form Recognizer  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Sean Flynn commented  · 

    It's in the "fields" collection under the documentResults array. The field label is the label value and the "text" is the OCRd value of the field.

  14. 1 vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Form Recognizer  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Sean Flynn shared this idea  · 
  15. 5 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Form Recognizer  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Sean Flynn shared this idea  · 
  16. 6 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    2 comments  ·  Form Recognizer  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Sean Flynn supported this idea  · 
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Sean Flynn commented  · 

    Roadmaps usually involve dates and I didn't see anything on those pages concerning GA for V2.

  17. 37 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    8 comments  ·  Form Recognizer  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Sean Flynn supported this idea  · 
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Sean Flynn commented  · 

    I'm trying to parse ACORD insurance forms which are produced by various software vendors which use different techniques for marking check boxes. Sometimes they use X, sometimes a graphic "X" and sometimes they using graphic check mark. Ideally I would want to identify a given box on the form as a check box and have a value returned of true/false as to whether there was any kind of mark inside of the box.

Feedback and Knowledge Base