- gutvol-d - lists.pglaf.org

Re: [gutvol-d] Indexing Editors, etc.
by D. Starner 19 Sep '04

19 Sep '04

Greg Newby <gbnewby(a)pglaf.org> writes: > Sorry about that, David. The reason is that the automatic cataloging > program only picks up the metadata in the book header like Author:, > Title:, etc. So is this something that I should take up within DP? What needs to be done that isn't? -- ___________________________________________________________ Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm

6 5

Indexing Editors, etc.
by D. Starner 19 Sep '04

19 Sep '04

There are three books just added to the database that were scanned by me: Essay on Wit, The Story of Sigurd the Volsung, and An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Taste. None of them have all the people listed on the title page included in the index. Why? At least in the case of Sigurd, the missing people rewrote a significant part of the text. -- ___________________________________________________________ Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm

4 3

Re: [gutvol-d] interesting stat from the news letter
by Joshua Hutchinson 19 Sep '04

19 Sep '04

DP produces about 200+ new books a month. Unfortunately, the proofers at DP, finish about 250 books a month. Which means we have an ungodly backlog of texts that need to be post-processed (over 450 books right now). Our proofing output has scaled up from last year, but our post-processing has not been able to keep up. There are plans for ways to improve the bottleneck. Unfortunately, developers to implement those ideas are another bottleneck. As big_bill at DP always says, though ... Those books aren't going anywhere and we will get to them eventually. :) JHutch ----- Original Message ----- From: Aaron Cannon <cannona(a)fireantproductions.com> Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2004 12:13:47 -0500 To: gutvol-d(a)lists.pglaf.org Subject: [gutvol-d] interesting stat from the news letter > I usually skim the news letter to see if there is anything new, and I > noticed this little stat: > 352 Average Per Month in 2004 > 355 Average Per Month in 2003. > > Anyone have any theories as to why we are doing fewer books per month on > average this year? Not complaining, just a little curious. > > Sorry if this is old news. > > > Sincerely > Aaron Cannon > > -- > E-mail: cannona(a)fireantproductions.com > Skype: cannona > MSN Messenger: cannona(a)hotmail.com (Do not send E-mail to the hotmail address.) > > > _______________________________________________ > gutvol-d mailing list > gutvol-d(a)lists.pglaf.org > http://lists.pglaf.org/listinfo.cgi/gutvol-d >

5 5

re: Re: [gutvol-d] interesting stat from the news letter
by Bowerbird＠aol.com 18 Sep '04

18 Sep '04

jeroen said: > Then, adding ASCII versions also adds to the delay, > as I can generate HTML from the SGML automatically, > but ASCII simply is too hard to automate, > which means redoing the tables again. i am confused about your work-process, jeroen, perhaps you could explain it to me? it would seem to me that the _output_ of the proofing process is the raw text, which one polishes as the ascii version and then -- if one chooses -- marks up some way. but from what you say, you work a different way, the .sgml (magically?) comes _first_, and is used to generate other versions, including the plain-text. what gives? -bowerbird p.s. i guess i'm also perplexed _why_ it is difficult to generate plain-ascii from .sgml. isn't it a straightforward matter of converting (or, in some cases, stripping away) the markup? or printing to .pdf and recovering text from that?

1 0

Re: [gutvol-d] interesting stat from the news letter
by Frank van Drogen 17 Sep '04

17 Sep '04

>I usually skim the news letter to see if there is anything new, and I >noticed this little stat: > 352 Average Per Month in 2004 > 355 Average Per Month in 2003. > >Anyone have any theories as to why we are doing fewer books per month on >average this year? Not complaining, just a little curious. I think one reason that DP produces a little less texts compared to approximately one year ago is the fact that more and more projects get HTML markup, which makes these texts a lot more usefull (IMHO), but reduces the output because people are still supposed to prepare the text version as well. So having to produce two versions, and the fact that adding markup, images, links between ToC and indices just takes more time reduces the quantity of the output. Having the HTML editions, however, definitely increases quality.... Frank >Sorry if this is old news. > > >Sincerely >Aaron Cannon > >-- >E-mail: cannona(a)fireantproductions.com >Skype: cannona >MSN Messenger: cannona(a)hotmail.com (Do not send E-mail to the hotmail >address.) > >_______________________________________________ >gutvol-d mailing list >gutvol-d(a)lists.pglaf.org >http://lists.pglaf.org/listinfo.cgi/gutvol-d

3 2

re: Re: [gutvol-d] interesting stat from the news letter
by Bowerbird＠aol.com 17 Sep '04

17 Sep '04

aaron said: > I didn't realize that there was such a backlog. Good luck > with that, especially with regards to automating the process. um, my post in support of the automatic text-to-html converters didn't mean to suggest there is a special push on to perfect them... i know of no such focused effort. indeed, one can get one's head bitten off in the d.p. forums for suggesting improvement is needed, or even that a minimal standard of usefulness should be created. the modus operandi seems to be that every person is free to wander off and create their own idiosyncratic .html version, "as long as it validates." in my humble opinion, that's a recipe for a nonstandardized library -- the same one that has given us 14,000 inconsistent ascii texts -- and a nonstandardized library is shorthand for a less-useful library. that reminds me, david moynihan recently offered his extensive collection of thousands of .html versions to project gutenberg. the only substantial reaction i saw was "your files don't validate". what was the response to that kind offer? was it turned down? -bowerbird

1 0

Top 100
by Marcello Perathoner 16 Sep '04

16 Sep '04

New experimental top 100 books and authors at: http://www.gutenberg.net/catalog/world/top Did you know our most read authors are Various and Anonymous? Did you know our most downloaded eBooks are: 1. Audio: "The House of Usher" by Edgar Allan Poe 2. Audio: "Bleak House" by Charles Dickens 3. Vanity Fair by William Makepeace Thackeray 4. Ulysses by James Joyce with 1. being downloaded 5 times as often as 2., and 9 times as often as 3. ? Yes, there is a solution to the mystery. Anybody wants to apply his/her reasoning power? The solution is a few lines down. It turns out I had to disqualify those as well as a few others that have mp3 files and use the word "House" in the title. (Moreover, research has shown that "Usher" is a rap artist. :-) -- Marcello Perathoner webmaster(a)gutenberg.net

4 8

re: Re: [gutvol-d] interesting stat from the news letter
by Bowerbird＠aol.com 15 Sep '04

15 Sep '04

frank said: > I think one reason that DP produces > a little less texts compared to > approximately one year ago is the fact that > more and more projects get HTML markup i believe that the .html converter programs (and the preparation of the plain-text files) should be improved to the point where they generate the .html version _automatically_. not only would this help cure the backlog, it would ensure that the .html versions are _uniform_ and _consistent_ across the library, which would make them _far_ more valuable... thank you for your time and consideration. -bowerbird

1 0

interesting stat from the news letter
by Aaron Cannon 15 Sep '04

15 Sep '04

I usually skim the news letter to see if there is anything new, and I noticed this little stat: 352 Average Per Month in 2004 355 Average Per Month in 2003. Anyone have any theories as to why we are doing fewer books per month on average this year? Not complaining, just a little curious. Sorry if this is old news. Sincerely Aaron Cannon -- E-mail: cannona(a)fireantproductions.com Skype: cannona MSN Messenger: cannona(a)hotmail.com (Do not send E-mail to the hotmail address.)

1 0

re: Re: [gutvol-d] Linking to PG policy
by Bowerbird＠aol.com 14 Sep '04

14 Sep '04

marcello said: > Nobody is breaking them on purpose. > They break because the files get moved. but the files are being moved on purpose, aren't they? so can't something be done? what about redirects? or nice little notes that tell the person where the file has been moved to? a coupon for $1 from see's candies? anything seems better than a 404. but perhaps there's something about the problem i don't understand. if that's the case, feel free to ignore me... :+) > Our policy directs users to set links to URLs that will not break. that's a good policy. people making new links should follow it. i'm just thinking about the links (who knows how many?) that are already out there that nobody is maintaining, or which couldn't be changed even if someone wanted to... -bowerbird

1 0