Indeed, human clerks transcribed the records. But since both the certification (2007) and the the copy of the original vital record (2011) are public, and they agree, there is no issue, except in the birfoon mind.<quoted text>
Thanks for the correction.
However,I am still left with the impression that a human must have been involved in the digitizing process. Judging by the skipping and faint typewriting on the original, it is highly unlikely that this could have been done by character-recognition software. Most likely a human entered the data, and that human must have looked at the document in order to enter the data. So a human most likely saw that the original (or the digital image of it) said HONOLULU.
And that is additional confirmation (if any additional confirmation really were needed) that there was indeed an original Hawaii birth certificate and that it showed HONOLULU as the place of birth.
Would this be correct? Or was it entirely automatic (the latter is very hard to believe).
Yeah, the latter is expensive and that just exactly what the State of Hawaii did. No, they did not simply make digital images, they transcribed all the data into a database.
No a clerk does not have to do anything but push a button once the correct record is located. This was described years ago.