- gutvol-d - lists.pglaf.org

Re: [gutvol-d] More on "My Antonia" (was Reply comments on US issues raised by '
by Joshua Hutchinson 13 May '05

13 May '05

----- Original Message ----- From: "Jon Noring" <jon(a)noring.name> > Also, anyone here interesting in > converting the markup to TEI? (It should be relatively straightforward > since I use a structural/semantic markup which is relatively > compatible with TEI markup principles.)] > Jon, I'm currently working closely with Marcello on the PGTEI spec. I'd love to have My Antonia to convert to TEI. Either send me a .zip file of the HTML you've got or give me a link to a download site and I'll put it on my to-do list. I can probably get to it middle to late next week. Josh

1 0

More on "My Antonia" (was Reply comments on US issues raised by 'orphan works')
by Jon Noring 13 May '05

13 May '05

[Pauline, I explain later on why I have not submitted "My Antonia" to DP. But if someone from DP here says to submit the scans and the current XHTML text for final-stage proofing, then I'll do so. I'll take care of the final XHTML markup. Also, anyone here interesting in converting the markup to TEI? (It should be relatively straightforward since I use a structural/semantic markup which is relatively compatible with TEI markup principles.)] Bowerbird wrote: > Jon wrote: >> I am looking for several proofreaders to finish the proofing of "My >> Antonia" by comparison of the present XHTML to the original page >> scans. It's been partially proofed already (errata has been >> submitted by several people already, including Bowerbird.) > i'm sitting on 2 more errors in "my antonia", jon -- one outright > error, and one consistency error -- waiting until you offer a $50 > bounty for the final error. :+) Don't hold your breath waiting for your moolah. <smile/> Anyway, I think you mentioned that "consistency" error before (it is an interpretation of what the typesetter did regarding spacing with respect to two classes of contractions -- and how they are done in the current XHTML is *correct* based on analyzing the 1926 second edition, which Willa Cather herself was active in its production.) It is interesting in what you've said before about the need for better errata reporting and correction mechanisms, meaning you want errata to be immediately fixed for Public Domain texts as they are found by users. Nice to see you are being consistent to your principles. I guess what you really meant to say is that "I will gladly submit my errata immediately after I am paid." <laugh/> Anyway, the proofers did find a couple errors (and as I noted the text has not been sufficiently proofed yet), which have been corrected in the current online text. I don't know if they corrected the errors you found, but I don't really care. And of course, I won't tell you here exactly what errors the proofers found, but for $100 I'll be happy to tell you (but I'll be nice and give you a clue: "didn't" and "liked".) Otherwise you can download the XHTML document again and run a 'diff' on it -- happy hunting! > i figure at some point, it will become worth that to you to be able > to say with confidence your text is error-free. What you are implying by this statement is that *you know* what the error-free text is supposed to be. Interesting that you apparently missed at least a couple errors. <laugh/> You did bring up a good point about the line break issue. This leads to my answer to Pauline's question on why I didn't use DP, and why I'm hesitant now to submit it to DP: 1) I had a project deadline where I had to get the text reasonably cleaned up and online *in a hurry* (with page scans) for demo purposes. I made that deadline, but it led me to not do it via DP. It was my intention to continue the clean-up process after the deadline -- it's only the right thing to do. However, for actual mass production of texts, DP or similar process would be used -- which I have noted a couple times before. 2) Additionally, because of the deadline, I decided to start with an HTML document which was already pretty well-proofed (it was NOT PG's version), and did various types of analysis and hand-proofing on it (including 'diff' to PG's version, which, though mangled, provided a reference point using the principle that most of the transcribed text in it is accurate -- all discrepencies between PG's and my version were then compared to the original page scans (most of the discrepencies were with PG's text, I might add.) If there were the same errors in both, then those errors would not be caught except by proofing, by running some auto-checks, and maybe by creating a third text using OCR and 'diff'ing that with the others, which is what I assume Bowerbird did.) 3) So, the source I used was already missing the original line breaks, another reason that it was probably too late to submit it DP, since I don't believe the text I've done up to now could be efficiently injected "midway" into DP's workflow; it would be a waste to have DP do it all over again when it is now in very good shape. If anyone reading this wants to help and proof a few pages using the "primitive" system I now have (e.g., just print out the pages from the page scans you would like to proof, and compare them with the online XHTML version which shows the page numbering and breaks. There are other ways to do this proofing by comparison, such as opening up two windows in your browser, one showing the page scan and the other the online XHTML text.) 4) As noted above, I would use a DP process for "mass production", but for this particular project did not for the reasons cited above. "My Antonia" is, and has always been, a demonstration project to experiment with new ideas, to get my hands "dirty" with the production process (although I've transcribed a dozen texts before), and to use it for showing to some people interested in this. Yes, it is just "one" text out of the 5000+ already done by DP, but "My Antonia" was not intended to be competitive to anyone. It is a first small and methodical step towards meeting several goals and proving some principles. It is still "beta", too, and hopefully all the ideas I want to experiment with will be implemented in a couple months (I've just started to implement what I'd like to implement.) What's been done so far has nicely assisted with the LibraryCity business plan, though, and may lead to a parallel business plan to be written by several of us in a couple months that's a little closer to the public domain text area. Btw, Bowerbird, I'm hoping to soon scan my copy of the *original* Burton edition of the Kama Sutra of Vatsyayana, and the scans will be submitted to DP as someone there requested. Like "My Antonia", I'm going to do high quality scans (at 600 dpi) and carefully clean them. This will be a tough test for your "we-don't-need-DP" approach: very small font, poor late nineteenth century typesetting, and some poorly printed pages (and this is one of the better copies of this book!) Maybe we should do a competition (you seem to love competition!): After I complete the scans, I'll submit them to both you and to DP. After the magic is done by you and DP, we'll compare the results (such as by 'diff'ing them) to look for inconsistencies which will then be compared to the original page scans. Of course, you will have to promise not to do late hours hand proofing of the text -- that'd be cheating -- you have to do it all auto-magically as you've been advocating. As some person whose name eludes may says, "The proof is in the pudding." Are you up to the challenge? <smile/> Anyway, I think such an experiment is good to gauge the current state of OCR and auto-processing to clean up texts, so it is a test which will benefit everyone. In addition, the careful screening of this text during the "competition" (such as by comparing the result of the two approaches) should lead to a *very low error*, possibly *zero error* digital text version, which can then be used for quick assessment of the accuracy of new OCR and auto-post-processing algorithms. I believe the Kama Sutra scans plus zero error digital text will make a good addition for a "test suite". Jon Noring

1 0

re: Re[2]: [gutvol-d] Reply comments on US issues raised by 'orphan works'
by Bowerbird＠aol.com 13 May '05

13 May '05

jon said: > I am looking for several proofreaders to finish the proofing of > "My Antonia" by comparison of the present XHTML to the > original page scans. It's been partially proofed already (errata has > been submitted by several people already, including Bowerbird.) i'm sitting on 2 more errors in "my antonia", jon -- one outright error, and one consistency error -- waiting until you offer a $50 bounty for the final error. :+) i figure at some point, it will become worth that to you to be able to say with confidence your text is error-free. by the way, how do you suggest people do the proofing? (it's darn hard to proof text with the linebreaks removed!) if you can guarantee the scans will stay available for a good time to come at their current location, i would be willing to customize my proofing tool to work with 'em. let me know if you are interested... *** pourlean said: > Why not just put the text through DP? there's an idea for you, jon. it might save you 50 bucks... ;+) -bowerbird

1 0

re: [gutvol-d] Reply comments on US issues raised by 'orphan works'
by Bowerbird＠aol.com 13 May '05

13 May '05

jeff said: > Know anybody who needs a proofreader? i hear jon noring is looking... ;+) -bowerbird

3 2

making CD / DVD best of 2005--how and which books?
by Scott Clous 12 May '05

12 May '05

making CD / DVD best of 2005. Which books, and why? I am eager to create an updated CD and DVD from the 2 that already exist, including the corrected versions. My motivation is 2 fold, people for better or worse download things that they think are the most current--using robots to get the most current versions vs. just the CD, etc. and because it does make the site more useable if one download gets them some wonderful content directly--and we all would want it to be the most current (and hopefully correct) versions. Many people have broadband now, and Bittorrent makes many things easier. I know there are some challenges in getting it together, then maintaining it, because the format of presenting the content has changed. Usually, without tagging the content itself, within a field to id that content as going onto a complitation, the only other method of selection is an index of choices for the CD or DVD. To start things off, I'd like to use the existing selections, update them, and make the CD available again. I also will review the new titles, Sherlock is near and dear to all our hearts, I'm sure, and include them if possible and their popularity warrents it. It would be nice to have a method to automatically update it -- fairy tales and all -- so that the site, and this part of it appear to be current. This last goal is additional work, but might be well worth it. Do any of the volunteers or programmers have feedback on these ideas? __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com

5 4

Re: gutvol-d Digest, Vol 10, Issue 11
by Scott Clous 12 May '05

12 May '05

The reasons people always will want a "standard" best of, is that it takes time to pick things. Also, that does make it a bit easier to mirror the isos. I want to do a CD first because getting a successful download is key, not how much stuff can be packed onto a DVD that can't be opened. Question--do most of the subscribers/downloaders live in the US, &/or are English speakers? While I would have thought at first to only have English content in a best of, my cousin who is overseas now is enjoying the German portions of the DVD! However, if the goal is to have something easy for the give away, at least on the CD I'll suggest we try for all English; Someone who speaks Spanish, etc. would be in a better place than I to answer the great works on the others, and would have a greater motivation to see it kept up. Greg--"I should have a program available soon (really, really soon - in time for Michael Hart's visit to Fairbanks in June) to "build your own" ISO. Seeding these with lists of eBook #s is the best possible start. I'm looking forward to you program, can you tell us a bit more about it, those of us who "just came in?" Greg-"I think that the current "Best Of" CD is probably your best starting point. While we've done many, many new eBooks since then, the best-known titles were already available for the CD. But many have been updated, and a few have had images or HTML added. Is there any way, other than manually to ID the books from the CD? DVD? __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail

2 1

Re: [gutvol-d] Re:making CD / DVD best of 2005--how and which books?
by Joshua Hutchinson 12 May '05

12 May '05

The future "master format" that you may hear people talk about will have something like this. PGTEI uses a divGen line to add the license when the master file is converted to text or html or PDF or ... The true ease will be in that changing one master license file will update the license in all the files in the archive. But, for legal reasons, we need the license in all the text and html files. Josh ----- Original Message ----- From: bill <bill(a)truthdb.org> To: gutvol-d(a)lists.pglaf.org Subject: [gutvol-d] Re:making CD / DVD best of 2005--how and which books? Date: Thu, 12 May 2005 02:44:15 -0400 > > I know this is likely not practical but I would like to see a read-only medium > where the legalese was exised out of the texts and stored in a license.txt in > the root of the file system. This would save a ton of space and allow for more > texts within the iso.I appreciate that the legal text has changed over the > years and is not consistant for all books but a notation "Licence--#01" or > whatever at the head of the book would allow you to cross-reference the > license file. Surely a one line system such as this would save bandwidth and > storage space while maintaining whatever legal requirements that must be met. > _______________________________________________ > gutvol-d mailing list > gutvol-d(a)lists.pglaf.org > http://lists.pglaf.org/listinfo.cgi/gutvol-d

2 1

re: [gutvol-d] Reply comments on US issues raised by 'orphan works'
by Bowerbird＠aol.com 12 May '05

12 May '05

jeff said: > nitpick ---> "quality" should be "qualify" thank you jeff, this made me laugh at loud! how many "proofreaders" here did that slip by? but given _enough_ eyeballs, all typos are shallow... ;+) -bowerbird p.s. of course, that's what happens when you press a deadline. but at least a response from project gutenberg got in... :+) oh yeah, i ordered a project gutenberg d.v.d a while back, and the service was prompt, friendly, and quite excellent. the d.v.d., along with a c.d. that was included free as well, is sitting here on my desk. thanks to three decades of volunteers!

2 1

Selling/Promoting The Gutenberg Project.
by rvijay07 10 May '05

10 May '05

More ideas: a) Get Librarians and Profs to refer to PG more. b) Have a copy of the PG CD/DVD available in libraries for others to make copies. Post prominent notices in this regard. c) Partner with other similar noble projects on the net for eg., http://bytesforall.org, Free Software Foundation, Freecycle etc., Comments welcome from all. Vijay _______________________________________________ No banners. No pop-ups. No kidding. Make My Way your home on the Web - http://www.myway.com

1 0

Book Submission Requirements
by N Wolcott 10 May '05

10 May '05

A couple of weeks ago there ws a post here that included the instructions for submitting a book in the case where it did not go through DP. Listed requirements lik??e Guiguts etc. However when I look at www.gutenberg.org the only requirement I see on the submissions page is to be W3C validated if html. Am I missing something and where can I find the full requirements. ?? N Wolcott nwolcott2(a)post.harvard.edu

3 3