Comments on: Cambridgeshire Police - Latest Information Released Under Freedom of Information Act http://www.rtaylor.co.uk/cambridgeshire-police-foi.html Cambridge, United Kingdom. Wed, 08 Feb 2012 12:03:31 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7 hourly 1 By: Richard http://www.rtaylor.co.uk/cambridgeshire-police-foi.html#comment-18635 Richard Sun, 04 Oct 2009 18:56:19 +0000 http://www.rtaylor.co.uk/?p=1528#comment-18635 Cambridgeshire Police have now removed the version of the disclosure log which they were not updating. Cambridgeshire Police have now removed the version of the disclosure log which they were not updating.

]]> By: Brian Johnson http://www.rtaylor.co.uk/cambridgeshire-police-foi.html#comment-11967 Brian Johnson Wed, 17 Jun 2009 07:25:16 +0000 http://www.rtaylor.co.uk/?p=1528#comment-11967 1. Interesting that the PDFs can only be viewed or printed - all other permissions are denied in the PDF's security settings. Further, the contents are encrypted and not accessible to search engines. That's not what I'd call 'freedom of information'. That said, such restrictions are no proof against taking a screen capture (even with Alt-PrtScn) and then saving the result for subsequent OCR. It works quite well. I wonder if the attempted prohibition against electronic dissemination is meant to drag the PDF down to the level of a printed document and somehow put it beyond the remit of the ICO's office? Puzzling. 2. The 'no-links' version of the page with FOI requests has the old 0845 number at its head. The 'links' version has the new 0345 number. I think that Google is just slow in updating its page-ranking to promote the new, 'links' version of the police website. If, instead of using Google, I go direct to http://www.cambs-police.co.uk/ (I would normally use http not https) and enter the letters FOI into the search box on that page, I get taken to a list of results within the police website. The first search result link merely takes you to a general overview of FOI with no onward links to lists of requests, but the second search result link takes you direct to the new, 'links' version of the information. (Interestingly, still served by http) (And, yes, I AM surprised that the first-listed search result has no onward links to the second, subordinate search result.) 3. I can find no reference to PC Hinks or Sgt. Wragg. Presumably you have found a hidden link which details the sad state of affairs with these individuals? 1. Interesting that the PDFs can only be viewed or printed - all other permissions are denied in the PDF’s security settings. Further, the contents are encrypted and not accessible to search engines. That’s not what I’d call ‘freedom of information’.

That said, such restrictions are no proof against taking a screen capture (even with Alt-PrtScn) and then saving the result for subsequent OCR. It works quite well.

I wonder if the attempted prohibition against electronic dissemination is meant to drag the PDF down to the level of a printed document and somehow put it beyond the remit of the ICO’s office? Puzzling.

2. The ‘no-links’ version of the page with FOI requests has the old 0845 number at its head. The ‘links’ version has the new 0345 number. I think that Google is just slow in updating its page-ranking to promote the new, ‘links’ version of the police website.

If, instead of using Google, I go direct to http://www.cambs-police.co.uk/ (I would normally use http not https) and enter the letters FOI into the search box on that page, I get taken to a list of results within the police website.

The first search result link merely takes you to a general overview of FOI with no onward links to lists of requests, but the second search result link takes you direct to the new, ‘links’ version of the information. (Interestingly, still served by http)

(And, yes, I AM surprised that the first-listed search result has no onward links to the second, subordinate search result.)

3. I can find no reference to PC Hinks or Sgt. Wragg. Presumably you have found a hidden link which details the sad state of affairs with these individuals?

]]>