October 2009 - gutvol-d - lists.pglaf.org

Re: is this the beginning of the end?
by Bowerbird＠aol.com 22 Oct '09

22 Oct '09

gardner said: > There is no doubt in my mind that > this is exactly what they will do. and, as i said, if that's actually what they do, we're in the same boat we've always been in, and this is just another ho-hum news item... > My bet is that they won't even proof the stuff i'm not sure i understand what you mean here; if they print the scans, there's nothing to proof. -bowerbird

3 2

is this the beginning of the end?
by Bowerbird＠aol.com 21 Oct '09

21 Oct '09

is this the beginning of the end? > http://www.techflash.com/seattle/2009/10/hp_amazon_team_on_rare_book_reprin… hewlett-packard is teaming with amazon.com to turn the scansets of the public-domain books from the university of michigan into paperbacks. hp will clean up the scansets, and print them, and amazon will sell those puppies, and split the cash with hp and u.m. it's ironic, because most of the u.m. scansets were done by google... and now amazon will sell them... i am assuming that hp won't just print the scans, but will actually clean up the o.c.r. and print that. if i'm right about that... then, relevant to the point here on this listserve, is this observation: if hp cleans up all the scansets, and prints them nicely to an inexpensive paperback, why should anyone here bother doing a digitization? instead, just buy the paperback, and scan that thing. with clean pages and clear digital printing, the o.c.r. will likely be near-perfect, so clean-up would be easy. now, of course, if hp is merely going to print the scans, then we'd be back in the same boat. but -- otherwise -- is this the beginning of the end? -bowerbird

3 2

let's wind this down
by Bowerbird＠aol.com 21 Oct '09

21 Oct '09

jim said: > 1) If I had submitted this book instead to DP there > would have been a much larger number of punc > errors introduced as "required" by the DP process. what? the d.p. process requires the introduction of errors? > 2) We would all still be waiting for this book, > because I prior submitted two books to DP after > a considerable amount of work on my part and > they have still to see the light of day. Someone > with a practical knowledge of queuing theory > needs to go over these issues with DP. you might want to discuss queuing theory in the d.p. forums. i suppose they would get a lot of good out of that discussion. > 3) I know perfectly well that errors remain unseen, > which is why I would like an input file format that > easily allows another motivated volunteer to > pick up where I left off when my children start complaining > that they are unfed and unclothed and "reality calls" i suppose i've already told you that z.m.l. does just that. i even mounted your very book, so that you could see it. so i don't suppose it'd do any good to repeat it again now. > rather than listening to Bowerbird insult my efforts i pointed out that your .txt version was missing the italics. if you consider that to be an "insult", your skin is too thin... > and insult my integrity simply because > I do not support his favored hack markup schemes no, you failed to support the project gutenberg standard, which calls for italics to be marked in the .txt format... > Presumably I followed the instructions on the PG website no, you most certainly failed to follow those instructions... > http://www.gutenberg.org/wiki/Gutenberg:Volunteers'_FAQ#V.94._What_sh ould_I_do_with_italics.3F you will see that it says: > Underscores are now the effective standard for italics in PG texts. -bowerbird

4 4

Current submissions to PG all go through the DP?
by Ricardo F Diogo 10 Oct '09

10 Oct '09

DMcCunney at Mobileread has stated that «Current submissions to PG all go through the DP proofing process, but there seems no way to get existing PG texts dating from before DP resubmitted for cleanup and quality control.» Is this any way true? When did that happen? Ricardo F. Diogo

2 1