From ag737 at freenet.carleton.ca  Mon Jul 11 12:45:54 2005
From: ag737 at freenet.carleton.ca (Wallace J.McLean)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 15:45:54 -0400
Subject: [PGCanada] Introducing... Vasa
Message-ID: <31afd2e2ea.2e2ea31afd@ncf.ca>

hello?


From sly at victoria.tc.ca  Mon Jul 11 12:54:38 2005
From: sly at victoria.tc.ca (Andrew Sly)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 12:54:38 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [PGCanada] Introducing... Vasa
In-Reply-To: <31afd2e2ea.2e2ea31afd@ncf.ca>
References: <31afd2e2ea.2e2ea31afd@ncf.ca>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.58.0507111249130.3675@vtn1.victoria.tc.ca>


Yes indeed.

Hello.

That one simple word has a few questions implied.
Here are some answers as I understand them:

1) Yes, this list has been very quiet for a while.
2) No, I am not aware of any great efforts towards
   a PG Canada lately.
3) I believe some people still have interest
   and are ready to "come on board" once something
   is actually in place that can be contributed to.
4) Yes, I do still think it is worth pursuing.

Does that help?

Andrew

On Mon, 11 Jul 2005, Wallace J.McLean wrote:

> hello?


From ag737 at freenet.carleton.ca  Mon Jul 11 12:56:13 2005
From: ag737 at freenet.carleton.ca (Wallace J.McLean)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 15:56:13 -0400
Subject: [PGCanada] Introducing... Vasa
Message-ID: <31505344f8.344f831505@ncf.ca>

> Does that help?

Yes it does!

Kay, folks -- back to work! Where is everyone? Let's do a headcount 
and see if we can't move a little closer to some of the goals we 
talked about last winter.


From jenzed at gmail.com  Mon Jul 11 13:59:39 2005
From: jenzed at gmail.com (Jennifer Zickerman)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 13:59:39 -0700
Subject: [PGCanada] Introducing... Vasa
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.58.0507111249130.3675@vtn1.victoria.tc.ca>
References: <31afd2e2ea.2e2ea31afd@ncf.ca>
	<Pine.GSO.4.58.0507111249130.3675@vtn1.victoria.tc.ca>
Message-ID: <7d57459705071113597547a7ab@mail.gmail.com>

Well, actually, there has been a little progress: we have donated web
space staged with the Gutenberg software distribution and a PostgreSQL
back-end. I didn't announce it on the list  because there's still
considerable setup and configuration to be done, so there's nothing
yet to "see", but the back-end is close to ready.

I've had to put Gutenberg on the back burner due to professional
commitments, and won't be able to devote significant time to the
project until September. However, I'd be happy to pass the baton along
if someone would be willing to take on the final setup and
configuration of the site


jen. 

On 7/11/05, Andrew Sly <sly at victoria.tc.ca> wrote:
> 
> Yes indeed.
> 
> Hello.
> 
> That one simple word has a few questions implied.
> Here are some answers as I understand them:
> 
> 1) Yes, this list has been very quiet for a while.
> 2) No, I am not aware of any great efforts towards
>    a PG Canada lately.
> 3) I believe some people still have interest
>    and are ready to "come on board" once something
>    is actually in place that can be contributed to.
> 4) Yes, I do still think it is worth pursuing.
> 
> Does that help?
> 
> Andrew
> 
> On Mon, 11 Jul 2005, Wallace J.McLean wrote:
> 
> > hello?
> _______________________________________________
> Project Gutenberg of Canada
> Website: http://www.projectgutenberg.ca/
> List: pgcanada at lists.pglaf.org
> Archives: http://lists.pglaf.org/private.cgi/pgcanada/
>


From gbuchana at rogers.com  Mon Jul 11 16:12:09 2005
From: gbuchana at rogers.com (Gardner Buchanan)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 19:12:09 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [PGCanada] Introducing... Vasa
In-Reply-To: <31505344f8.344f831505@ncf.ca>
Message-ID: <XFMail.050711191209.gbuchana@rogers.com>

Here!

On 19:56:13 Wallace J.McLean wrote:
> 
> Where is everyone?

============================================================
Gardner Buchanan                       <gbuchana at rogers.com>
Ottawa, ON             FreeBSD: Where you want to go. Today.


From dfewer at uottawa.ca  Tue Jul 12 13:54:33 2005
From: dfewer at uottawa.ca (David Fewer [c])
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 16:54:33 -0400
Subject: [PGCanada] Also here [signed]
Message-ID: <200507122054.j6CKsXS5006891@mx2.uottawa.ca>

Also here . . . very very distracted by other files here at the office (read
copyright bill).

David Fewer

Legal Counsel
Canadian Internet Policy & Public Interest Clinic




--
------------------------ [ SECURITY NOTICE ] ------------------------
To: pgcanada at lists.pglaf.org.
For your security, dfewer at uottawa.ca
digitally signed this message on 12 July 2005 at 20:54:36 UTC.
Verify this digital signature at http://www.ciphire.com/verify.
------------------- [ CIPHIRE DIGITAL SIGNATURE ] -------------------
Q2lwaGlyZSBTaWcuAVdwZ2NhbmFkYUBsaXN0cy5wZ2xhZi5vcmcAZGZld2VyQHVvdHRhd
2EuY2EAZW1haWwgYm9keQCNAAAAfAB8AAAAAQAAAAwu1EKNAAAAWgIAAgACAAIAII0vNb
QCZqZKtgZxVWB2W9w9GEOvVG4bVCOKR9aAuUteAQAfoNy+Y/qFKxzE9NJt8h14k4xYs6T
wEUnGDeeZZRY5whlxb8CEDyUK2Q9gRa2XwP6tnHFd+5QdJP1bygBmQ9TXU2lnRW5k
--------------------- [ END DIGITAL SIGNATURE ] ---------------------
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/html
Size: 1772 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.pglaf.org/pipermail/pgcanada/attachments/20050712/8459c5d0/attachment.txt>

From jeremy.lammi at uleth.ca  Tue Jul 12 14:02:58 2005
From: jeremy.lammi at uleth.ca (Jeremy Lammi)
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 15:02:58 -0600 (MDT)
Subject: [PGCanada] material
In-Reply-To: <200507122054.j6CKsXS5006891@mx2.uottawa.ca>
References: <200507122054.j6CKsXS5006891@mx2.uottawa.ca>
Message-ID: <1431.70.65.169.56.1121202178.squirrel@70.65.169.56>

Hi All,

Perhaps a stupid question but has anyone done a
preliminary list of material?

Jeremy



From mlockey at honson.com  Tue Jul 12 15:41:29 2005
From: mlockey at honson.com (Michael Lockey)
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 18:41:29 -0400
Subject: [PGCanada] Introducing... Vasa
In-Reply-To: <31afd2e2ea.2e2ea31afd@ncf.ca>
References: <31afd2e2ea.2e2ea31afd@ncf.ca>
Message-ID: <42D44719.1020704@honson.com>

Wallace J.McLean wrote:

>hello?
>  
>
Still here, albeit sick, still working on things - particularly DP.  I 
have a DP-CAN (DP-50) site ready to launch, but after discussion felt 
that now is not the time- DP-EU must be more robust, and DP-INT is also 
going through a shakedown.  When we DO go, I've got some SUPER material 
to start...

Michael Lockey (Vasa)


From sly at victoria.tc.ca  Tue Jul 12 15:53:11 2005
From: sly at victoria.tc.ca (Andrew Sly)
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 15:53:11 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [PGCanada] material
In-Reply-To: <1431.70.65.169.56.1121202178.squirrel@70.65.169.56>
References: <200507122054.j6CKsXS5006891@mx2.uottawa.ca>
	<1431.70.65.169.56.1121202178.squirrel@70.65.169.56>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.58.0507121543200.16219@vtn1.victoria.tc.ca>


Hi Jeremy

On Tue, 12 Jul 2005, Jeremy Lammi wrote:

> Perhaps a stupid question but has anyone done a
> preliminary list of material?
>

If you wish to make such a list, please go ahead and do so.

As I've said before, I don't think that finding material
or lack of ideas for material will be a problem at all.

I have a list of 350+ canadiana titles already in PG
and PG Australia that could be adapted, I have a shelf
of a few Life+50 PD books, I see more possibilities almost
every time I visit the library, and I know other people
have ideas too.

In the end, I think it will be the same as what we find
at PG--whatever volunteers want to work on is what will
be added to the collection.

Andrew


From gbuchana at rogers.com  Tue Jul 12 21:34:11 2005
From: gbuchana at rogers.com (Gardner Buchanan)
Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2005 00:34:11 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [PGCanada] material
In-Reply-To: <1431.70.65.169.56.1121202178.squirrel@70.65.169.56>
Message-ID: <XFMail.050713003411.gbuchana@rogers.com>

Hi Jeremy,

My feeling is that PG is about collecting and housing whatever
texts the volunteers are motivated to submit.  It's not about
going after any particular set of materials.

That said, there are some useful lists of candidata material.
especially here:

http://www.kingkong.demon.co.uk/abyod/abyod.htm

That's a lot of stuff to go through, and it leaves you back at
deciding for yourself what you think would be worth adding.

On 21:02:58 Jeremy Lammi wrote:
> Hi All,
> 
> Perhaps a stupid question but has anyone done a
> preliminary list of material?
> 
> Jeremy

============================================================
Gardner Buchanan                       <gbuchana at rogers.com>
Ottawa, ON             FreeBSD: Where you want to go. Today.


From ag737 at freenet.carleton.ca  Wed Jul 13 06:48:35 2005
From: ag737 at freenet.carleton.ca (ag737 at freenet.carleton.ca)
Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2005 09:48:35 -0400
Subject: [PGCanada] material
Message-ID: <287284a0.84a02872@ncf.ca>

> That said, there are some useful lists of candidata material.
> especially here:
> 
> http://www.kingkong.demon.co.uk/abyod/abyod.htm

Another useful trick is to use a year as a term in the NAME field in 
an AMICUS (National Library of Canada) search. You can easily weed out 
the ones born in that year. There are some errors and discrepencies in 
the biblio data though.


From ag737 at freenet.carleton.ca  Wed Jul 13 10:28:54 2005
From: ag737 at freenet.carleton.ca (Wallace J.McLean)
Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2005 13:28:54 -0400
Subject: [PGCanada] Introducing... Vasa
Message-ID: <e425101a2.101a2e425@ncf.ca>

----- Original Message -----
From: Michael Lockey <mlockey at honson.com>
Date: Tuesday, July 12, 2005 6:41 pm
Subject: Re: [PGCanada] Introducing... Vasa

> Still here, albeit sick, still working on things - particularly DP.  
I 
> have a DP-CAN (DP-50) site ready to launch, but after discussion 
felt 
> that now is not the time- DP-EU must be more robust, and DP-INT is 
also 
> going through a shakedown.  When we DO go, I've got some SUPER 
material 
> to start...

Man oh man oh man oh man oh man, I just bought a book that is 
screaming for a life+50 home, and it's FREAKIN' KILLER!

Can you give us a quick pr?cis of what's happening at DP-EU and the 
Mothership?




From gbuchana at rogers.com  Wed Jul 13 19:57:40 2005
From: gbuchana at rogers.com (Gardner Buchanan)
Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2005 22:57:40 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [PGCanada] Introducing... Vasa
In-Reply-To: <e425101a2.101a2e425@ncf.ca>
Message-ID: <XFMail.050713225740.gbuchana@rogers.com>


On 17:28:54 Wallace J.McLean wrote:
> 
> Man oh man oh man oh man oh man, I just bought a book that is 
> screaming for a life+50 home, and it's FREAKIN' KILLER!
>

Col Choat of PG-Australia can host Life+50 stuff right now.

============================================================
Gardner Buchanan                       <gbuchana at rogers.com>
Ottawa, ON             FreeBSD: Where you want to go. Today.


From AuntieSocial at rogers.com  Thu Jul 14 14:22:34 2005
From: AuntieSocial at rogers.com (AuntieSocial)
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2005 17:22:34 -0400
Subject: [PGCanada] Life+50 home(s)
References: <20050714190004.B861B8C969@pglaf.org>
Message-ID: <002001c588ba$2a3b4870$300f9918@lynupcnaa328zv>

As will PG-Europe.  They have now moved their server to Serbia, which has 
Life+50 rules.

~Marilynda Fraser-Cunliffe

----- Original Message ----- 
> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2005 22:57:40 -0400 (EDT)
> From: Gardner Buchanan <gbuchana at rogers.com>
> Subject: Re: [PGCanada] Introducing... Vasa
> To: Project Gutenberg of Canada <pgcanada at lists.pglaf.org>
> Message-ID: <XFMail.050713225740.gbuchana at rogers.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
>
> On 17:28:54 Wallace J.McLean wrote:
>>
>> Man oh man oh man oh man oh man, I just bought a book that is
>> screaming for a life+50 home, and it's FREAKIN' KILLER!
>>
>
> Col Choat of PG-Australia can host Life+50 stuff right now.
>
> ============================================================
> Gardner Buchanan                       <gbuchana at rogers.com>
> Ottawa, ON             FreeBSD: Where you want to go. Today.
>




From mlockey at honson.com  Thu Jul 14 20:22:27 2005
From: mlockey at honson.com (Michael Lockey)
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2005 23:22:27 -0400
Subject: [PGCanada] Status of Mothership and DP-EU (and even DP-CAN)
Message-ID: <42D72BF3.5080607@honson.com>

For those who don't know, the term 'Mothership' was coined by DP-EU as a 
friendly appelation of the original site, which should, logically and 
honestly, but isn't (out of a marvellous and praiseworthy reticence) be 
called DP-US.  However, the other sites (DP-EU and potential others) 
acknowledge our debt to the primary site.  'Mothership' is cool enough.

Bearing in mind that I am not a policy maker, nor have I access to 
anything other than public information, I've been around long enough 
that I can honestly say the quality of submissions from DP is much 
higher than when individuals were doing all their own work, with no 
checks except ad hoc.  Naithless, PSTB have determined that quality and 
workflow could be further optimized.  The old system was, basically, 
broken down into Content Provision, two rounds of Proofing (including 
formatting), Post Processing (basically sewing all the parts back 
together and ensuring consistancy, and Post-Process Verification. The 
new system has changed from the two Proofing rounds to two Proofing 
rounds (P1/P2) and two Formatting rounds (F1/F2).  And additional 
(though optional) Whitewashing has also been implemented.  I believe 
that virtually everything is being generated in both ASCII and HTML.  
Ability to perform certain tasks is no longer assumed. For example, you 
must proof 200 pages of an acceptable standard, and be on site for at 
least four months, before you may proof P2.

Results to date have been mixed.  While no one doubts that the long term 
will make things better (apparently the overall quality has improved an 
order of magnitude):  however, production is down; and there are both 
current and predicted bottlenecks which will take months to resolve.  
All of this has led to a certain -brittleness? - on the site, with all 
the questions being raised, and with, alas! some people taking offense 
at things that were certainly not meant to do so.  DP is still, without 
doubt, the friendliest site on the web, and matters will be resolved.  
Finally, all in process work had to be redone.

DP-EU has not yet reached a critical mass.  A great dealt of this is 
due, I think, to the tremendous challenges faced in dealing with so many 
language groups.  (Do you know the site has even been localized in 
Urdhu?)  So far, there are not enough proofers in many different 
languages.  I think, for example, there is only one Bulgarian proofer.  
Who can P2 his work?  I'm very concerned with mentoring at DP-INT, and 
try to do it at DP-EU, too: but we don't have beginner queues there- and 
I'm basically monolingual.  We really need Mentors in each language.  
(Mentoring is, IMHO, one of the main reasons for DP's success.  Not  
only do we assure a level of quality, but we let newcomers know that we 
are a friendly mob, and that they are appreciated.  /Very /important.

Even today, much of the work at EU comes from INT volunteers.  Nowt 
wrong with that.  And, in turn, Team Canada members are an important 
part of INT.  While we- me, at least- would dearly like to see DP-CAN up 
and lurching, it would obviously reduce resources currently active on 
the other two sites.  I do have an agreement with TPL for publicity to 
get new proofers when we do launch, (and they are going to be providing 
some magnificent material), but let's make sure the two existing sites 
are not undermined.

In the meanwhile, you can submit Life+50 material through DP-EU or, as 
some are doing, amass it till we do launch.

Cheers,

Michael Lockey (Vasa)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/html
Size: 3921 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.pglaf.org/pipermail/pgcanada/attachments/20050714/d2a4d6db/attachment.txt>

From jivadas3 at yahoo.ca  Thu Jul 14 22:05:40 2005
From: jivadas3 at yahoo.ca (jiva das)
Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2005 01:05:40 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [PGCanada] Enough Flashing
In-Reply-To: <42D72BF3.5080607@honson.com>
Message-ID: <20050715050540.29383.qmail@web53206.mail.yahoo.com>

I might even do a few pages for DPCan, if you get it working. 
 

 
jivadas

Michael Lockey <mlockey at honson.com> wrote:
For those who don't know, the term 'Mothership' was coined by DP-EU as a friendly appelation of the original site, which should, logically and honestly, but isn't (out of a marvellous and praiseworthy reticence) be called DP-US.  However, the other sites (DP-EU and potential others) acknowledge our debt to the primary site.  'Mothership' is cool enough.

Bearing in mind that I am not a policy maker, nor have I access to anything other than public information, I've been around long enough that I can honestly say the quality of submissions from DP is much higher than when individuals were doing all their own work, with no checks except ad hoc.  Naithless, PSTB have determined that quality and workflow could be further optimized.  The old system was, basically, broken down into Content Provision, two rounds of Proofing (including formatting), Post Processing (basically sewing all the parts back together and ensuring consistancy, and Post-Process Verification. The new system has changed from the two Proofing rounds to two Proofing rounds (P1/P2) and two Formatting rounds (F1/F2).  And additional (though optional) Whitewashing has also been implemented.  I believe that virtually everything is being generated in both ASCII and HTML.  Ability to perform certain tasks is no longer assumed. For example, you must proof 200 pages of an
 acceptable standard, and be on site for at least four months, before you may proof P2.

Results to date have been mixed.  While no one doubts that the long term will make things better (apparently the overall quality has improved an order of magnitude):  however, production is down; and there are both current and predicted bottlenecks which will take months to resolve.  All of this has led to a certain -brittleness? - on the site, with all the questions being raised, and with, alas! some people taking offense at things that were certainly not meant to do so.  DP is still, without doubt, the friendliest site on the web, and matters will be resolved.  Finally, all in process work had to be redone.

DP-EU has not yet reached a critical mass.  A great dealt of this is due, I think, to the tremendous challenges faced in dealing with so many language groups.  (Do you know the site has even been localized in Urdhu?)  So far, there are not enough proofers in many different languages.  I think, for example, there is only one Bulgarian proofer.  Who can P2 his work?  I'm very concerned with mentoring at DP-INT, and try to do it at DP-EU, too: but we don't have beginner queues there- and I'm basically monolingual.  We really need Mentors in each language.  (Mentoring is, IMHO, one of the main reasons for DP's success.  Not  only do we assure a level of quality, but we let newcomers know that we are a friendly mob, and that they are appreciated.  Very important.

Even today, much of the work at EU comes from INT volunteers.  Nowt wrong with that.  And, in turn, Team Canada members are an important part of INT.  While we- me, at least- would dearly like to see DP-CAN up and lurching, it would obviously reduce resources currently active on the other two sites.  I do have an agreement with TPL for publicity to get new proofers when we do launch, (and they are going to be providing some magnificent material), but let's make sure the two existing sites are not undermined.

In the meanwhile, you can submit Life+50 material through DP-EU or, as some are doing, amass it till we do launch.

Cheers,

Michael Lockey (Vasa)
_______________________________________________
Project Gutenberg of Canada
Website: http://www.projectgutenberg.ca/
List: pgcanada at lists.pglaf.org
Archives: http://lists.pglaf.org/private.cgi/pgcanada/


SUPPOSE THAT THERE WAS SOMEBODY OUT THERE TRYING TO TALK!!! Tune in with a Free Screensaver: http://setiathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/ A project of the U of Calfornia, listening in on outer space.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/html
Size: 4651 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.pglaf.org/pipermail/pgcanada/attachments/20050715/99f6e910/attachment.txt>

From sly at victoria.tc.ca  Sun Jul 17 00:27:21 2005
From: sly at victoria.tc.ca (Andrew Sly)
Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2005 00:27:21 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [PGCanada] Status of Mothership and DP-EU (and even DP-CAN)
In-Reply-To: <42D72BF3.5080607@honson.com>
References: <42D72BF3.5080607@honson.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.58.0507170004580.14475@vtn1.victoria.tc.ca>



On Thu, 14 Jul 2005, Michael Lockey wrote:

> I've been around long enough
> that I can honestly say the quality of submissions from DP is much
> higher than when individuals were doing all their own work, with no
> checks except ad hoc.  Naithless, PSTB have determined that quality and

Interesting argument. One that I might disagree with on some levels.

Some books, prepared by some people for PG have had a truly exceptional
quality, without going through the DP process. But yes, overall the
quality evens out to a higher level from DP. What I miss from the DP
process is having a holistic view of the book in question. I find that
if I am preparing a text carefully, I really get a feeling for its
quirks, its style, its _personality_. This puts me in a better
place to anticipate what errors are worth searching for, and
what choices to make in ambiguous situations.

It is my impression that not all PP's connect with a text on
this same level. As the system is set up, it's easy to just
check what other peopl have marked as possibly needing attention,
run some automatic checks, and then forward the file.

As I perceive it, PP'ing has been a bottle-neck in in DP, the
same the equivilant in a smaller process
because to actually _do it well_ takes a bit of creativity
and a decent amount of effort, and is sometimes quite boring.


Andrew


From mlockey at honson.com  Mon Jul 18 07:57:57 2005
From: mlockey at honson.com (Michael Lockey)
Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2005 10:57:57 -0400
Subject: [PGCanada] Status of Mothership and DP-EU (and even DP-CAN)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.58.0507170004580.14475@vtn1.victoria.tc.ca>
References: <42D72BF3.5080607@honson.com>
	<Pine.GSO.4.58.0507170004580.14475@vtn1.victoria.tc.ca>
Message-ID: <42DBC375.4000504@honson.com>

Andrew Sly wrote:

>On Thu, 14 Jul 2005, Michael Lockey wrote:
>
>  
>
>>I've been around long enough
>>that I can honestly say the quality of submissions from DP is much
>>higher than when individuals were doing all their own work, with no
>>checks except ad hoc.  Naithless, PSTB have determined that quality and
>>    
>>
>
>Interesting argument. One that I might disagree with on some levels.
>
>Some books, prepared by some people for PG have had a truly exceptional
>quality, without going through the DP process. 
>
Please; I would just like to make it clear that much excellent work HAS 
been, and continues to be, published by individuals,  and even works of 
lesser quality can be the equivalent of (so-called) published books.  I 
don't think I've ever seen a book without errata, and some- including 
best sellers- can be appalling.  It'll be interesting to see how Mr. 
Potter fares this time...  No; I'm talking about the overall 
performance; and not making any comparisons.  Our mandate must simply 
include continuous improvement.

DP is, I assume, aware that folk with enthusiasm will be more involved 
with a work.  Upcoming books are announced at several stages of the 
process so that anyone with interest can grab stuff that excites them, 
both for processing and whitewashing.  (I have just grabbed /The Old 
Coast Road/, since I'm very interested in historic transportation.)  By 
definition, proofers will, when possible, go for what they enjoy.

But there's always /Copyright Renewals/, and /the Grammer of English 
Grammers/...

Michael Lockey
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/html
Size: 2070 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.pglaf.org/pipermail/pgcanada/attachments/20050718/0e81d159/attachment.txt>

From jon at noring.name  Mon Jul 18 11:00:55 2005
From: jon at noring.name (Jon Noring)
Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2005 12:00:55 -0600
Subject: [PGCanada] Status of Mothership and DP-EU (and even DP-CAN)
In-Reply-To: <42DBC375.4000504@honson.com>
References: <42D72BF3.5080607@honson.com>
	<Pine.GSO.4.58.0507170004580.14475@vtn1.victoria.tc.ca>
	<42DBC375.4000504@honson.com>
Message-ID: <44666122.20050718120055@noring.name>

Michael Lockey wrote:
> Andrew Sly wrote:
  
>> I've been around long enough
>> that I can honestly say the quality of submissions from DP is much
>> higher than when individuals were doing all their own work, with no
>> checks except ad hoc.  Naithless, PSTB have determined that quality and
  
> Interesting argument. One that I might disagree with on some levels.
>
> Some books, prepared by some people for PG have had a truly exceptional
> quality, without going through the DP process.

Definitely. Some of the PG texts I've used for republishing (where I
have to carefully go over the transcription quality) have been
outstanding -- very low error rates and faithfulness to the source
(which I borrow to compare the text to.) But then I've had the dog as
well where the text is full of errors, and there's other troubling
anomalies such as reworked paragraphs and so on.

To add to this, NetWorker recently determined that the text of PG's
'Frankenstein' is pretty much identical to that of a modern edited edition
issued by Bantam (ca. 1980 if I remember correctly), and "conveniently"
there are no original page scans to verify this -- and there is no record
of what was the source book, as was Michael Hart's policy up until
recently. (His policy a few years ago was to specifically NOT allow
detailed source information to be included with the texts, with certain
exceptions granted.)

However, what is not talked about much is that DP is a more open and
public system. That is, DP is not relying on one scribe working alone,
whose labor has no public oversight. Rather, the proofing at DP is done
in the open, among a group of people who otherwise have no
relationship with each other, and no vested interest in a particular
outcome. The perception of trustworthiness and faithfulness this adds
to the final work product cannot be underestimated, especially when
markets such as education, public libraries, and scholars, wish to
use the texts. In addition, DP is preserving the page scans, and in my
private conversations with Juliet, will eventually make them public.
This adds to the faithfulness aspect, and allows others to know for
certain the source book, and have the ability to verify textual
faithfulness. It is a show of "good will" and confidence the work was
done right: "we stand behind our work and proudly provide the page
scans as proof of the trustworthiness of our work" (of course, there
are also tangible benefits, besides perception alone, to providing
the page scans, but I'm focusing on the perception of trust aspect.)

Most of the pre-DP texts do not have scans to back them up (many were
typed in so no scans were made), and for most of these texts the source
book is not even referenced. Note again what I mentioned above about
'Frankenstein' -- NetWorker analyzed only one book this way, and had a
100% hit -- one wonders how many other pre-DP PG texts were taken from
modern edited editions and nobody knows about it except the transcriber?
Will they ever talk to reveal their sources? Unlikely.

I hope that PG Canada will embrace the DP system or something similar
(where, in a public setting, multiple people are involved in proofing
and checking each other's work), and that the page scans from the
original source are made publicly available to proudly sit side-by-side
the structured digital text versions.

Let me state it clearly that what I say above is not intended to
disparage those who do work alone -- most of them are diligent and
committed to textual fidelity. They produce great work. But the
problem is, how in 50-100 years does anyone know a particular text,
done alone this way, is textually faithful to the original? One could
say "John Scribe did this book, and you can trust his work". Well, the
obvious question 50-100 years from now is "Who is Joe Scribe? Show me
the original page scans, and was that book transcribed by a group of
people working in public who checked each other's work?"

One of the books I publish is the Kama Sutra of Vatsyayana, which was
written ca. 3rd century CE in India. Unfortunately, only a few copies
exist, and none of them are complete. In addition, comparing these
copies with each other we find huge difference between them. Sir
Richard Burton had to combine some source copies he had available to
him, and using textual analysis, his legendary linguistic ability,
and historical knowledge, try to discern what the original text must
have been. It is obvious that over the centuries, as scribes copied
the work, that the scribes introduced their own changes to the text
(of course in some cases there had to be "modernization" of the
language as the Hindi language evolved over the centuries.) Because
there was no dedication to faithful preservation, we no longer have
the original Kama Sutra. It is gone forever.

Today we have a Public Domain, and it's the only one we have, and any
group digitizing the Public Domain should commit themselves to textual
fidelity, and setting up the process that will not only achieve this,
but to show others that indeed textual fidelity to the source was
achieved, and can be demonstrated. Technology now allows us to achieve
this transparency.


>  Please; I would just like to make it clear that much excellent
> work HAS been, and continues to be, published by individuals,

Agreed!

I've done some texts myself a few years ago for issuance as commercial
books, having typed them in by hand, and proofed. I've slaved over these
texts (both by eye and various search tools) and I know the error rate
is *very low*. Yet, because I did them myself with no public oversight,
and did not do any page scans, I will not release the texts to PG
because they were not done using a trustworthy process, even though *I
know* they are very faithful and done well. One of the texts, Burton's
"Kama Sutra" (see above), I recently scanned at high quality, and the
scans have been submitted to DP for proofing, which I hope will soon
commence. The text that results *will* be much more trustworthy and
worthy of public preservation than mine, even though I know mine is
textually faithful. I hope this makes sense in that I practice what I
preach, and will not submit digital texts of Public Domain works
without taking steps to assure trustworthiness (and since DP is there,
that's where I presently will submit them.)

I trust my work, but you should NOT trust my work. And if you tell me
you cannot trust my work by *how* I did it, I will not be offended,
and neither should those who also transcribed texts alone. If they
are offended, I don't believe they yet understand the larger issues
involved. It is understandable they may not want to understand, after
having put in hundreds and even thousands of hours of hard labor into
their lone proofing activities.


> and
> even works of lesser quality can be the equivalent of (so-called)
> published books.? I don't think I've ever seen a book without
> errata, and some- including best sellers- can be appalling.? It'll
> be interesting to see how Mr. Potter fares this time...? No; I'm
> talking about the overall performance; and not making any
> comparisons.? Our mandate must simply include continuous improvement.

Definitely! Having the scans available to the public is an important
component since it allows rapid determination if there is a
transcription error.

Michael Hart now wants to "correct" the errors found in many of the
non-DP texts. Good luck. There's no source information recorded (so no
source to consult with), and no scans to consult. How can one correct
errors when one doesn't have the source to correct to? Some errors can
be corrected, but others cannot. What about "Huck Finn" where
misspellings are the norm? And what about broken up and run together
paragraphs and even sentences? (Not to mention missing sentences and
paragraphs due to transcribing errors -- how will these be found
without painstaking comparison to a printed edition?) And what about
"Americanized" British spelling? The list goes on and on.

I've stated many times that PG should simply redo the older texts
through the DP system, and this time find an authoritative source
copy, and get the page scans online. Problem solved.

(Regarding "authoritative", let me give another example. Burton
published another book contemporaneous to the "Kama Sutra", the
"Perfumed Garden of Sheik Nefzaoui", published about 1885. This book
has proven to be quite rare, and not found in many libraries. Around
1913 (or so), a pirated reissue was published. Because of the fear of
prosecution or simple disgust, a whole chapter was removed, and a few
paragraphs elsewhere removed. So the 1913 issue is a censored copy.
Unfortunately, that censored pirated copy was widely sold, and is
the dominant edition found in academic libraries today. Well, guess
what edition was used for the online text versions of the "Perfumed
Garden"? You got it right -- it is the censored, pirated edition. What
is scary is that those who put this text online did not know this, and
even after I told them about it, they didn't care -- they didn't even
bother to put up a disclaimer or to say it comes from a later censored
pirated reissue. And this is the text that is being spread in every
corner of the Internet, on mirrored hard drives and backup media all
around the world. Unless something is done, in 50-100 years when one
searches for Burton's "Perfumed Garden", the censored edition will be
the one brought up, and the end-user will not even know it is the
censored edition -- they will take it at face value that it is the
original. (This "face value" acceptance is what worries me about the PG
collection.) I'm working to try to rectify this, but the lesson is
that those who digitize public domain texts need to do a little study
on each work being digitized, to assure the source(s) they use is/are
reasonably authoritative, and of course to record the source metadata
along with making the page scans public. There are lots of scholars
out there who know bibliographic information about particular
works who would be glad to advise. Do your homework, post on the
Internet to ask for help, and learn a little about each work before
going through the digitization process...)


> DP is, I assume, aware that folk with enthusiasm will be more
> involved with a work.? Upcoming books are announced at several
> stages of the process so that anyone with interest can grab stuff
> that excites them, both for processing and whitewashing.? (I have
> just grabbed The Old Coast Road, since I'm very interested in
> historic transportation.)? By definition, proofers will, when
> possible, go for what they enjoy.

Definitely! And for particular book topics, one can go outside to
various forums and quickly recruit volunteers. There now seems to be
forums for just about every subject and author out there. DP has not
done this because it doesn't have to at this time (they are working at
their limit), but I see PG Canada doing this for particular books.
What about an old book on the history of Barrie? (a hypothetical
example). Just contact the Barrie historical group(s) and other Barrie
organizations, and voile', a bunch of people will show up at the door
to help with basic and mundane proofing. Provide a convenient online
interface to assist with the proofing (like DP does), and one will be
able to find willing and enthusiastic volunteers for just about every
book under the sun.


Just my $0.02 worth.

Jon