- gutvol-d - lists.pglaf.org

Re: In search of a more-vanilla vanilla TXT
by Bowerbird＠aol.com 11 Sep '09

11 Sep '09

i said: > a web-browser won't wrap the lines on a .txt file, so > if the hard-returns were removed from p.g. .txt files, > the lines would run off the screen of a web-browser. i'm sorry. i was wrong. safari (at least) does wrap the lines. i'm not sure where i got that idea... at any rate, my apologies for the misinformation. -bowerbird

2 1

In search of a more-vanilla vanilla TXT
by Greg M. Johnson 11 Sep '09

11 Sep '09

Jay Toser wrote: > 1) ... I LOVE TEXT ... Me too. My problem is that the HTML n.n (n's being really small numbers) format I think is more universally viewable TODAY than the 80-character-line TXT on more devices (my ipod touch and 12" wide laptop screen each giving different readability problems: wacky wraparound and too fine a print in Notepad, respectively). > 2) My only recommendation in this debate is this: There is no longer a need for a > hard line break at every 80 character line. However, I believe there is still a need for a > hard line break between paragraphs. Completely agreed. That was the gist of my original proposal. Another question is whether today's most primitive TXT-reading softwares now come with wraparound-- and by this I mean "terminal editors" like emacs and vi. Or what is the most primitive device in use today-- is it a 1980 Win 3.1 'puter, perhaps the itouch (in some regards)? Another idea is whether we could tolerate another format. If we've already got half a dozen, why not have another that is "non-80 plain text" (defined above by Jay). -- Greg M. Johnson http://pterandon.blogspot.com

3 2

TXT format and hard line breaks
by Christa & Jay Toser 10 Sep '09

10 Sep '09

I do not often post to this list. But the question is relevant. Unfortunately, I must state my preference for raw text files. And, to a great extent, I agree with Bowerbird. At least, those parts I can read. You need to know that I live in America. Born here. But I currently "surf" the "internet" with a PowerPC 6100/66. I use Mozilla ver. 3.0. Macintosh operating system 7.5.1. Dial-up is mostly 56K. Try downloading video with that set-up. In fact, try reading this user list with that set-up. I get SOME messages when I read directly. I get OTHER messages when I choose to read "raw source." And, when I go to my workplace, and read on their PC computers, I read more DIFFERENT messages. [Their internet connection is lots better. They download about 1/2 terabyte a day.] And yet, of the three different places that I can read this list, I NEVER get ALL the messages. Each and every one is different. Oh yes, there is overlap, but I'm not really sure if I have really gotten all the messages. Honestly! So, I think the original question was a two parter: 1) Why text only? 2) Why the hard line breaks? I must first apologize if I offend anyone by answering question 1). Text was considered universal to the English speaking world -- way back when Project Gutenberg started. This was at a time when Unicode would not exist for about two decades. I LOVE TEXT. As I just said above, I will not/can not/am not allowed to/ read all of your messages. Even if I go through three different setups, and two different servers, I am still not certain that I have read everything you have sent. I feel that I am being censored by the internet. It is truly my opinion that, if e-mail were just sent in TEXT, then I would know more of this world. Yes, a picture is worth a thousand words. No, I would rather read a thousand words than see a picture. Especially in this modern day, when everyone and their mother have a better way of showing data. Every country on the entire planet (that's what? 300+ countries?) they all have a new and better way to format text. Every different language must somehow show their data somehow JUST ABSOLUTELY CORRECT. Their standard is right. This standard is right. That standard is right. No, everything is wrong. Let's re-invent the wheel from scratch. No, it doesn't "look right." It has to be "correct." It is wrong if the text lines "break" at the "wrong" place. Errrm, got carried away there. In my opinion, I think the raw text of each book in Project Gutenberg, is the ultimate in how a book should be delivered. Again, I apologize if I have offended anyone on this list for writing my obvious opinion. 2) Why the hard line breaks? Partially, this was covered by (I think) Bowerbird. There was a time when there were no fonts. Specifically, there were no "variable-width" fonts. Way before the Macintosh existed, there was only one way to read text. And it was only one width per each character, and there were only 80 characters per line. Max. Period. And when Project Gutenberg was started, he set the standard at whatever existed at the time. Break it at never more than 80 characters -- and break it between words. No hyphenation. Now, this problem of hard line breaks is a legitimate problem. Now, several decades after Macintosh (and later, PC's); it is my considered opinion that there is no need for a hard line break. Even way-back-when, in the early days -- there was question of whether a hard line break was just a <LF> (line feed) or <CR><LF> (carriage return, followed by line feed). Yep, there were format problems back before 1980. Now-a-days, with all the wonderful formatting which is available; in so many different fonts; in so many different platforms; with so many different programs; that can read so many different styles; well then -- what do we choose is right? **sigh** Above, I have described my computer system. I will tell you, that my computer system is more advanced than perhaps 2/3rds of the world. Most do not have the bandwidth for a .pdf. Or actually any kind of formatted book. Maybe, they have an hour per week at an internet cafe. At 10-12K speed. They don't care if the line breaks are wrong. They care if they can read the books. And pretty much throughout that world, they can only read the books, ONLY if simple 8-bit ASCII text exists. No one on Project Gutenberg, NO ONE, can guarantee a more universal format, nor a faster format to download, than text only. (Except perhaps 7-bit ASCII, [capital letters only]; or OCTAL; but that diverges.] My only recommendation in this debate is this: There is no longer a need for a hard line break at every 80 character line. However, I believe there is still a need for a hard line break between paragraphs. I believe the text versions of the books can be scanned for single <CR> or <CR><LF> groups, and be removed. Double <CR><CR> or <CR><LF><CR><LF> should be maintained. And yes, I feel strongly this can be done to the ORIGINAL .txt files. It is my opinion that the technology of the world has truly advanced beyond the need for a hard line break at the end of every line. Paragraph breaks, yes. Line breaks, no. As to how this would translate into .pdf or Kindle? Gagg me with a spoon. I'm not there. Hope this helps, Jay Toser

1 0

why the plain-text format is the most useful format for eliciting beauty (and more)
by Bowerbird＠aol.com 09 Sep '09

09 Sep '09

read the reviews for the iphone e-book viewer-app called "eucalyptus". you will see that it gets credit for making p.g. e-texts look beautiful... eucalyptus uses the plain-text format; it elicits beauty from that format. greg notes that david widger and al haines are "updating" older e-texts with .html equivalents. do you know how they are accomplishing that? they run a program that converts the plain-text format to an .html file. to put it in other words, the .html file is elicited from the plain-text file. i guess david and al want to "get the credit" for creating the .html files, which is fine. but if they really wanted to increase overall productivity, they'd turn the conversion routine loose, so any end-user could run it, without having to wait for david or al to get around to the file they want. moreover, with more people using the routine, chances are that it would be improved via open-source coding contributions, which would be cool. but remember, it's the plain-text file that puts all of this action in play... *** greg said: > Nobody has argued that text is the master format, or should be. that's bull-shit, pure and simple. i have argued -- at length, with good arguments, ones that nobody has been able to counter -- that the plain-text format is the master. the same conversion processes that enable eucalyptus to elicit beauty from the plain-text file and which enable whitewashers to elicit .html can be used to create any type of file-format we might want to elicit, from the kindle to .epub to .pdf to .rtf to .lit to the-next-big-thing... now, that's not to say that the current form of the plain-text files is good enough to do the job, because it's not. but that's simply because the "powers that be" haven't accepted the modifications i've suggested. but that's their stupidity, it's not an inherent weakness in the format... in summary... if you're not smart enough to see that i have won this particular debate, step right up into the circle and i will be happy to knock you out, again. -bowerbird

3 2

Re: why the plain-text format is the most useful format for eliciting beauty (and more)
by Bowerbird＠aol.com 09 Sep '09

09 Sep '09

david said: > And thanks to Apple, another compelling reason don't care to get into the ring itself, do you david? so you point to a shiny distraction off to the side! we're talking about the plain-text format, and how it is the most useful format for eliciting beauty (and more)... we're talking about how so many people -- like you -- argued with me over a period of several years about this very point, and how i have emerged victorious... that's what we're talking about... -bowerbird p.s. and, since you mentioned it, the brouhaha with apple gave _tons_ of additional exposure to eucalyptus, so -- in the end -- it gave the program a tremendous lift. i'm gonna do everything i can to make sure that my apps are held up by apple the same way, to get public sympathy.

1 0

What is the intended use of TXT format-- why line breaks?
by Greg M. Johnson 09 Sep '09

09 Sep '09

Hi. I have looked at PG's books in both HTML and TXT formats, on several different devices, from large-screen laptops to netbooks to an Ipod Touch. In just about every possible scenario, I had the line breaks creating an irregular right margin down the screen that made for unpleasant reading. I also tried taking one of the raw TXT files to make "my own" HTML file, and was tripped up by the line breaks. In order to prevent me from making the suggestion of changing the whole collection, can someone tell me why that number of characters on the screen was chosen? -- Greg M. Johnson http://pterandon.blogspot.com

9 15

Re: labor day -- working for peace
by Bowerbird＠aol.com 08 Sep '09

08 Sep '09

bastien said: > Using uppercase letters in not completely useless... what is wrong with us americans? and what is wrong with our justice system? -bowerbird

1 0

labor day -- working for peace
by Bowerbird＠aol.com 08 Sep '09

08 Sep '09

the rev. carl kabat has spent over 10 years in jail as "punishment" for his _symbolic_ protests against nuclear weapons. > http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/07/us/07activist.html what is wrong with our justice system? what is wrong with us? -bowerbird

2 1

!@! An urgent appeal to all Canadian supporters of Project Gutenberg
by Michael S. Hart 07 Sep '09

07 Sep '09

Please forward as you feel appropriate. Michael S. Hart Founder Project Gutenberg ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sun, 6 Sep 2009 01:03:59 -0700 (PDT) From: Mark Akrigg <contact.gutenberg(a)yahoo.ca> To: Michael Hart <hart(a)pobox.com> Cc: hart(a)pglaf.org Subject: An urgent appeal to all Canadian supporters of Project Gutenberg Dear friends: I am the founder of Project Gutenberg Canada, and would like to make a special appeal to Canadian supporters of Project Gutenberg. Our government is sponsoring a Copyright Consultation on future changes to the Copyright Act. This is an unprecedented request from the government for the people of Canada to express their views on copyright law. Please consider making your personal submission. In the submission which I made on behalf of Project Gutenberg Canada, I made the following five recommendations: 1. A "Safe Harbour" provision for works more than 75 years old where the life dates of the authors are not known 2. No extensions of copyright durations 3. Explicit assignment to the Public Domain of those photographs that were in the Public Domain in 1997 4. 75 year copyright for works with more than 15 authors 5. Enhanced protection of the Public Domain You can read the full PG Canada submission at http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/008.nsf/eng/01390.html Your own submission should be in your own words, and can be quite short. We don't want to bury the government in spam, and truly individual submissions will have the greatest effect. There is no need to precisely mirror the recommendations I made. You will find the main Copyright Consultations page here: http://copyright.econsultation.ca/ You will find information on how to email your submission here: http://copyright.econsultation.ca/topics-sujets/show-montrer/18 You might also wish to send a copy of your submission to your Member of Parliament: http://www2.parl.gc.ca/Parlinfo/Compilations/HouseOfCommons/MemberByPostalC… The main Copyright Consultation page has information on how you can participate in the forums being conducted by the government on copyright issues, which naturally cover many issues which do not affect PG Canada, but do affect your life in other respects. The main thing is to make your submission sooner rather than later: the Copyright Consultation ends on September 13th. It appears possible that there will be a federal election in Canada this fall. Don't forget to tell your candidates that they are answerable to you when it comes to copyright law, and that you expect any future government to protect and promote the Public Domain. Thank you in advance for your help. And don't forget to make your submission! Dr. Mark Akrigg Founder, Project Gutenberg Canada

2 1

keeping up with cory
by Bowerbird＠aol.com 04 Sep '09

04 Sep '09

if you haven't kept up with cory lately, he does a nice little history review here: > http://www.locusmag.com/Perspectives/2009/09/cory-doctorow-special-pleading… money quote: > I don't give away downloads because I'm just a swell guy -- > I do it because I'm a self-employed entrepreneur who > needs to make as much as he can to support his family. in other words, a free online copy doesn't _cost_ him money, it _makes_ him money. -bowerbird

1 0