December 2012 - gutvol-d - lists.pglaf.org

ebook reader market share report
by James Adcock 18 Dec '12

18 Dec '12

http://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/by-topic/digital/devices/article/54705-ki ndle-share-of-e-book-reading-at-55.html Note that this report says that only 6% of readers use their computers to read ebooks. Another 6% use an iPhone or a smart phone.

9 24

Re: [gutvol-d] ebook reader market share report
by don kretz 13 Dec '12

13 Dec '12

Or there are more or better ways to get PG texts than coming to PG directly for epub devices than there are for mobi devices. Sent from my Phone From: James Adcock Sent: 12/13/2012 10:12 PM To: Project Gutenberg Volunteer Discussion Subject: Re: [gutvol-d] ebook reader market share report >Figures are worthless without a detailed description of the methodology used to derive them. Doesn't mean that both PW and PG statistics couldn't be right -- but even you acknowledge that it seems likely that fewer PG users actually read HTML downloads rather than just glance at them to preview whether or not an epub or mobi is worth downloading. >The epub downloads from PG are nearly twice the mobi downloads. Could that be because the mobis you generate are still generally more defective than the epubs? _______________________________________________ gutvol-d mailing list gutvol-d(a)lists.pglaf.org http://lists.pglaf.org/mailman/listinfo/gutvol-d

1 0

12-12-12
by bowerbird 13 Dec '12

13 Dec '12

on december 9th, 2012, jon said: > You sacrifice the ability > to change fonts on the fly > which is important to some people a .pdf does not allow the person to change the _size_ of the text, and that is a factor far more important to a good many people. plus, even then, there are a number of other variables that users _might_ want to control which can't be changed when they use a .pdf. it's amusing that _exactly_ one year earlier -- december 9th, 2011 -- i posted a message where i shared the first-draft of a checklist of the variables that readers like to control: > http://lists.pglaf.org/mailman/private/gutvol-d/2011-December/008474.html some of these _can_ be controlled -- at least in _some_ viewer-programs, using some formats -- but most of 'em can't be changed in a .pdf; they're frozen in the concrete of that format... that's why we should give end-users the ability to make a .pdf customized to their preferences; unfortunately, i think the la/tex learning-curve is too steep to suggest it as our path for that. but it's nice jon can make a .pdf that _he_ likes! -bowerbird p.s. i wouldn't put jon's versions out in public, however, since there's no need to introduce _more_ one-off snowflakes to an already-confused situation. just more crap the future will have to analyze and toss aside once it decides it must sort it all out... p.p.s. my dad came from a family that had 12 kids -- 6 boys and 6 girls. and my mom came from a family with 12 kids: 6 boys and 6 girls. what are the odds?

1 0

12-12-12
by bowerbird 12 Dec '12

12 Dec '12

on december 9th, 2012, jon said: > You sacrifice the ability > to change fonts on the fly > which is important to some people a .pdf does not allow the person to change the _size_ of the text, and that is a factor far more important to a good many people. plus, even then, there are a number of other variables that users _might_ want to control which can't be changed when they use a .pdf. it's amusing that _exactly_ one year earlier -- december 9th, 2011 -- i posted a message where i shared the first-draft of a checklist of the variables that readers like to control: > http://lists.pglaf.org/mailman/private/gutvol-d/2011-December/008474.html some of these _can_ be controlled -- at least in _some_ viewer-programs, using some formats -- but most of 'em can't be changed in a .pdf; they're frozen in the concrete of that format... that's why we should give end-users the ability to make a .pdf customized to their preferences; unfortunately, i think the la/tex learning-curve is too steep to suggest it as our path for that. but it's nice jon can make a .pdf that _he_ likes! -bowerbird p.s. i wouldn't put jon's versions out in public, however, since there's no need to introduce _more_ one-off snowflakes to an already-confused situation. just more crap the future will have to analyze and toss aside once it decides it must sort it all out... p.p.s. my dad came from a family that had 12 kids -- 6 boys and 6 girls. and my mom came from a family with 12 kids: 6 boys and 6 girls. what are the odds?

1 0

Frankenstein PDFs
by Jon Hurst 10 Dec '12

10 Dec '12

Hi all, I've done a LaTeX version of 41445 and generated PDFs in Kindle size and A5. They are uploaded at: Kindle sized: http://www.hursts.eclipse.co.uk/frank-6.pdf A5: http://www.hursts.eclipse.co.uk/frank-6.pdf The Kindle sized one gives 11pt text for devices with a 6 inch diagonal and has very small margins. It is designed for use on smaller e-ink style devices. The A5 one gives 12pt text on a 10.1 inch diagonal and has margins, page numbers, running headers and suchlike. It is designed for larger tablets, general purpose computers and printing. I would be grateful if you could try them out on any devices you have and let me know if anything doesn't work. Also, I would like to know if you spot any formatting issues. Many thanks Jon Hurst p.s. If you are interested in the LaTeX itself, it is available at: https://github.com/JonHurst/frankenstein-imp

2 2

Re: [gutvol-d] Frankenstein PDFs
by James Adcock 09 Dec '12

09 Dec '12

PS: I think the link you gave to the A6 is in error.

2 1

no wonder i'm frustrated
by Bowerbird＠aol.com 05 Dec '12

05 Dec '12

here's a copy of a list i made in a post from october of 2004 -- that's right, october of _2004,_ more than 8 years ago -- explaining the workflow of the infrastructure i'd suggested: 1. the e-texts -- as they are now -- must be regularized. 2. i can write programs to do most of that automatically. 3. the results need to be checked for quality control, and 4. some missing information will need to be re-inserted. 5. once that is done, the files will be _finished_, in that 6. my viewer will present them as high-powered e-books. 7. users can push a button to create high-end .html files, 8. or save text as an .rtf file, or print out to paper or .pdf, 9. in a way that gives 'em customized high-quality output. 10. my program will do text-to-speech, and screenshots, 11. and let people explore the project gutenberg library, 12. and easily report errors they encounter in any e-text. 13. those error-correction reports will be automatically 14. routed to a system that presents all the material, so 15. a human only has to say "yes" to approve the mod, and 16. change-logs will be updated and a notice distributed. 17. this e-text standardization and ease of handling will 18. nurture a flowering of synergistic uses of the library 19. by an array of creative and imaginative programmers 20. that will engender a book-driven revolution in thought. 21. and everyone will live happily ever after. the end. still seems like a good plan to me... then again, who cares? -bowerbird

3 2

of course, i'm not really frustrated
by Bowerbird＠aol.com 04 Dec '12

04 Dec '12

of course, i'm not really frustrated. i was, for a while, but i got over it... plus there was an offsetting benefit. because one of my big faults is that i positively love to say "i told you so". and i have had _lots_ of opportunities over the years to exercise that option. so, for me, it's all extremely amusing. it would have been better, for sure, if you had listened to me, allowed me to be useful, create a well-oiled machine, use the p.g. library to drive forward the reality of the future of electronic-books, and thus help the world be a better place. we surely wouldn't be stuck now with the notion that scan-sets are "good enough" for archive.org, and file-formats such as .epub and .mobi are all we can hope for. but i'm a firm believer in the karma that the world gets exactly what it deserves... so i hope you like what you deserve here. which is me telling you that "i told you so". -bowerbird

1 0

no wonder jim is frustrated
by Bowerbird＠aol.com 04 Dec '12

04 Dec '12

download-counts listed on the p.g. website as of this weekend: huck finn #76 -- 22887 downloads -- 98.3% huck finn #32335 -- 391 downloads -- 1.7% total downloads -- 23278 downloads -- 100.0% no wonder jim is frustrated... *** the new frankenstein is faring better, but only relatively: frankenstein #84 -- 12907 -- 95.0% frankenstein #41445 -- 677 -- 5.0% total downloads -- 13584 -- 100.0% *** and nobody seems to have much input on d.p. accuracy, or the need (or lack of need) to check their current work. moreover, the absence of response to my poll question on crappy books that need to be re-done might well be taken as a sign nobody really cares about _that_ too much either. so maybe we can just retire those as topics of conversation. *** ok, so then how is your holiday shopping coming along? -bowerbird

2 1

your mistake
by Bowerbird＠aol.com 03 Dec '12

03 Dec '12

mjit raindancerstahl said: > Bowerbird admits his error, and apologizes. It's either > a sign of the Apocalypse, or the Second Coming. well, gee, i should hope there's a few other possibilities. because a choice of those two is limited and unfulfilling. indeed, it's not even a choice at all, but just a no-brainer. but, in actuality, this development isn't novel in the least. i've admitted every mistake of substance i've made here. every single one. and apologized for any which had personal ramifications, without regard for the degree of unimportance involved... so if you feel that is not the case, do please let me know, detailing the exact particulars, so that i can address them. specifically, is there anything i have done to wrong _you?_ -bowerbird

5 7