February 2006 - gutvol-d - lists.pglaf.org

re: !@!Re: [gutvol-d] blah blah blog
by Bowerbird＠aol.com 01 Feb '06

01 Feb '06

a description of the zen markup language format can be found at: > http://snowy.arsc.alaska.edu/bowerbird/test-suite/zml11rules.txt i didn't examine this old file closely to see if i would update any of it, but i'm sure that the vast majority of what it includes is still current... the aim is to make the format simple enough that a fourth-grader can understand it and use it productively, so i'm interested in the feedback that any fourth-graders out there might have... :+) -bowerbird

1 0

re: [gutvol-d] Language free version of guiguts?
by Bowerbird＠aol.com 01 Feb '06

01 Feb '06

i said: > it's fair to say yep, that's me, and not some rogue impostor, just mailed from my girlfriend's account, so you know. -bowerbird

2 1

re: [gutvol-d] blah blah blog
by Bowerbird＠aol.com 01 Feb '06

01 Feb '06

michael said: > I read the PG eBooks with all sorts of plain text viewers > and have no problems with inconsistencies, much less in > the various browsers that have a wider range of options. the inconsistencies are ones that a person "wouldn't notice", but which trip up any automated processing by a program... an obvious example would be that most section-headings (e.g., chapter headings) are preceded by four blank lines, but the occasional one might have three, or five, instead... nobody would claim that, in terms of a human reader, this inconsistency is meaningful -- it's not -- but when it comes to a program analyzing the file, it might make a difference... if there's only one level of header, then 3 or 4 or 5 blank lines might be equally good at signaling that there is a new section. but if a book has three different levels of headers, as some do, then you could use 5 blank lines to indicate the major sections, 4 to indicate regular sections, and 3 to indicate the subsections. if the number of blank lines isn't consistent, the program has to become much more sophisticated (and thus prone to failure) to try and determine the _actual_ level of each header. another example involves lines which should not be rewrapped, such as the lines in a table, or the lines in a letter's address-block. if these are consistently prefaced with one or more leading spaces, then a rewrap routine is easy to _write_ and easy to _comprehend_, and a programmer can spend time on more productive pursuits that add value and functionality, not ones that just resolve inconsistencies. lots of programmers have _started_ programs for the p.g. library. the vast majority of them have given up before long, in frustration. the inconsistencies in the formatting are the main source of difficulty. someday someone will set up a shadow version of the p.g. library where all the inconsistencies are resolved, and you will see then how much value is added by the ingenuity of programmers who are able to take consistent formatting of the e-texts for granted... -bowerbird

4 7

Re: [gutvol-d] Language free version of guiguts?
by Joshua Hutchinson 01 Feb '06

01 Feb '06

> ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Dave Fawthrop" <hyphen(a)hyphenologist.co.uk> > > With my other hat on I write "intelligent" language software, Low 90% > correct is very bad, above 99% correct is acceptable. For a voluntary > organisation I would be accept 50% correct. > Run a spellcheck on that same document. If you get even the low 90% that you deem very bad, I'd be amazed. GutCheck is working on something with even MORE ambiguous rules... grammar. 50% correct wouldn't be just acceptable, it would be outright, amazingly, fantasically, beyond expectations ... GOOD. Josh

1 0

re: [gutvol-d] Ebook reading devices
by Bowerbird＠aol.com 01 Feb '06

01 Feb '06

ian said: > Fair enough - then the iRex device > might be a better bet. And less proprietry. might be. except i heard it will be $300-$500. with no deep pockets to subsidize and back it. way too much for a dumb terminal in this age... next? -bowerbird

9 11

Anyone recomend a good free wisywig html editor to PG standards
by Dave Fawthrop 01 Feb '06

01 Feb '06

Just turning my Hartley books into html. The generate html function of guiguts did not do a bad job of generating html, but the poetry needs a lot of tweaking. But it expects me to insert flags by hand :-( I gave up doing that in the bad old nroff days. <shudder> way back in OMG 1986. Anyone recommend a good free windoze html editor to PG standards? I normally use an old copy of M$ Front page for html. -- Dave Fawthrop <dave hyphenologist co uk> "Intelligent Design?" my knees say *not*. "Intelligent Design?" my back says *not*. More like "Incompetent design". Sig (C) Copyright Public Domain

2 1

Re: [gutvol-d] "Lady Chatterly's Lover" public domain in the U.S.?
by Tony Baechler 01 Feb '06

01 Feb '06

Hello all. Not that this means anything, but I saw an audio version of this on the Internet Archive. Since the IA is based in the US, I would presume that they cleared the copyright but maybe not. It looks like a volunteer human reading. Details on which source edition are vague or nonexistant. You can look if you want. Just search for it at http://www.archive.org/. I'm not sure if it is in the audio collection or the ourmedia collection so I suggest using the general search form. If this is still under copyright, someone should tell them so they can remove it or move it to a European server. It was posted last August so could be gone by now.

1 0

!@!Re: [gutvol-d] blah blah blog
by Bowerbird＠aol.com 01 Feb '06

01 Feb '06

mikey said: > Please keep comments on issues > raised in bowerbird's "blah blah blog" > off this list. sorry to disturb your sleep, mikey. but you can go back to bed now... *** bastien said: > Can we see the code? no. > Can we use/test/improve it? i'll release an app sooner or later that you can use. as far as the routines themselves, creating them took a _persistent_ application of common-sense and a lot of elbow-grease. that's all. which means you can generate them yourself, if you really want. i'll also be willing to give you some pointers if you should happen to hit a wall at any point, once you have shown me you are willing to take on the job. or, if you prefer, you can take the shortcut, and buy my source code. the price is in the 6 figures. i can't afford to give away something that valuable. if you can, i suggest you buy it and give it away... but really, what i want you to take away is that you _can_ do this, and it's really not even all that _hard_. for instance, i've talked about using the number of preceding blank lines as an indicator of heading level. assuming that such consistency has been maintained, even a beginning programmer could write the code to ascertain the structure of a book. care to try it? write it in pseudo-code first, and then in a language, any language with which you are comfortable, be it perl or python or ruby or basic or whatever you like. it might be better to take it over to gutvol-p, so we don't put a coding session in all the gutvol-d boxes, but if you show me you're willing to do some work, i'll be more than happy to show you what will pay off. if you're not, then i'll refer you to the fables of aesop, specifically the one about the little red hen... *** michael said: > There's nothing wrong with > what such people are asking, > other than that they are asking > someone else to do it for them, > free of charge. i know that michael is talking about "such people" as a general class, and i'm fairly confident he doesn't lump me in that class. but other people here might. so let me be absolutely clear here for them... i'm not asking anyone to do anything "for" me. and i am more than willing to do the job myself. i said so, directly, on my blog, and i repeat it here. what i am doing is suggesting you make these changes for _yourselves_ and for _your_readers_, simply because consistency in the e-texts leads to greater functionality... my experience is that this greater functionality would benefit you with increased efficiency in the preparation of the e-texts, and benefit your readers in greater total usability of the e-texts. > Those of us who have been on this list, and others, > for very long these days have no trouble remember > any number of people who have had variety upon variety > of requests that Project Gutenberg should be run in > such a fashion as to meet with their demands. again, i make no "demands". just giving you tips. for your own good. > The response is always to invite the creation of some examples, > along a suggested pathway for future efforts, to be accompanied by > your request for others to assist you in making such future efforts. it is also the case that i _am_ putting examples online. i've already pointed to some, and more will come soon. > http://snowy.arsc.alaska.edu/bowerbird/alice01/alice01/alice01.zml > http://snowy.arsc.alaska.edu/bowerbird/alice01/alice01/alice01.html > http://snowy.arsc.alaska.edu/bowerbird/alice01/alice01/alice01.pdf > http://snowy.arsc.alaska.edu/bowerbird/alice01/alice01/alice01b.pdf other examples will be "my antonia", "books and culture", "free culture", "the universe or nothing", "the secret garden", and a handful of books by cory doctorow, for starters. as z.m.l. requires just a smattering of changes to the markup-free version of an e-text, hundreds of examples will follow before long, and thousands once my processes are refined... if i don't lose interest, i might have most of the library converted in a year. from these plain-text .zml "masters" will emerge automatic .html versions -- from which a plethora of other formats will be able to be generated -- and automatic creation of .pdf versions according to user specifications... other sweetnesses might follow too, like ipod versions and p.s.p. versions. and last but not least, the z.m.l. viewer-app will create a kick-ass powerful high-functionality electronic-book experience using these .zml "masters". enough so that you'll wonder why you ever thought you needed "markup". (there's more -- scansets and banana-cream -- but that's enough for now.) > Describe how these examples are better than previous examples have done, and will continue to do, as appropriate times arrive... -bowerbird

2 1

re: [gutvol-d] Language free version of guiguts?
by Morasch＠aol.com 01 Feb '06

01 Feb '06

it's fair to say that gutcheck is an excellent piece of software. it's also fair to say that it returns far too many false positives. it's also fair to say that we _could_ have hoped that gutcheck's status as "open source" would have lead it to be _improved_ far more often than it has been, given its level of importance. it's also fair to say that it wouldn't be that hard to improve it, if someone _decided_ to, as the problems are not intractable. it's also fair to say if nobody improves it, it won't be improved. all those things are fair to say. -bowerbird

1 0

Re: [gutvol-d] Language free version of guiguts?
by Dave Fawthrop 01 Feb '06

01 Feb '06

On Tue, 31 Jan 2006 19:30:55 +0000, Cori <hiddengreen(a)gmail.com> wrote: |On 1/31/06, Dave Fawthrop <hyphen(a)hyphenologist.co.uk> wrote: |> |Indeed :) Catching a dozen real errors is a definite win! |> |> 12 in 500plus is a resounding failure. | |I think there might be a misunderstanding about the purpose of the |Gutcheck ... if a text checking tool was provided that never gave me |any false errors, I'd be convinced that it wasn't catching all it |should be. Spellcheckers, or the barrage of regex checks that DP has |developed, all flag up false positives on my books, but they couldn't |be made much more effective without personalising them to each and |every text -- which would take more time than just clicking through |the false alarms..? The point of all these checks is to (hopefully) |be over-sensitive to problems, rather than under-sensitive (thus |leaving errors.) | |Or have I missed something in turn..? Do you have text checking tools |that only ever signal real errors..? Can they be shared..? With my other hat on I write "intelligent" language software, Low 90% correct is very bad, above 99% correct is acceptable. For a voluntary organisation I would be accept 50% correct. -- Dave Fawthrop <dave hyphenologist co uk> "Intelligent Design?" my knees say *not*. "Intelligent Design?" my back says *not*. More like "Incompetent design". Sig (C) Copyright Public Domain

2 1