- gutvol-d - lists.pglaf.org

re: [gutvol-d] on viewing the .pgtei file directly
by Bowerbird＠aol.com 24 Aug '05

24 Aug '05

hey jon noring, as long as you're still moderating michael hart over on your listserve, i'm still declining to talk with you here... but please, do have a nice day anyway... :+) -bowerbird

1 0

on viewing the .pgtei file directly
by Bowerbird＠aol.com 24 Aug '05

24 Aug '05

i think it would be marvelous to view the .pgtei file directly. why go through the pain of conversion if you don't have to? and the .pgtei file is the one with all the information in it, not? might as well view that, rather than some pale conversion... but let's get real here for a minute, ok? if the only people who can view the .pgtei file directly are the few who happen to be using a specific browser, there's no need to put a lot of resources in that direction. however, that's not really what lee is talking about, is it? no, it isn't. no sir. what lee is _really_ talking about is "openreader", which he has begun programming. (you _have_ begun, haven't you, lee? because there's no time like the present.) because, you see, a specialized e-book viewer-program (like openreader) can deliver an e-book experience that _far_surpasses_ the one that an end-user gets in a browser. and _that_ is the reason why people would want to view a .pgtei file directly, rather than look at an .html conversion; not because of the files per se -- it's silly to think end-users care anything about formats -- but because of the _viewer_ and the e-book _experience_ that was delivered therein... (savvy lurkers will recognize this as a straightforward variant of the argument i have been making all along...) so, if lee can deliver an openreader that is _cross-platform_ and runs on _older_hardware_, using _minimal_resources_, and can render the .pgtei file directly, giving the end-user a powerful e-book experience, all from a free-beer program, no one will use their funky web-browser to read an e-text... so let's wish lee success in his endeavor, for the ultimate good of all the end-users... -bowerbird p.s. when i try to view 16523-x.xml directly in firefox, it says: "this xml file does not appear to have any style information associated with it. the document tree is shown below." and then it shows me the document tree. how can i fix this problem?

2 1

Re: gutvol-d Digest, Vol 13, Issue 24
by Lee Passey 24 Aug '05

24 Aug '05

David A. Desrosiers" <hacker(a)gnu-designs.com> wrote: >> I've learned the fear the <div> container. Let me show you why using >> a <div> container for "non-specific" blocks of text won't work. > >> <div> >> <head>Level 1</head> >> <p>Paragraph 1.</p> >> <div>Block o' text.</div> >> <p> Paragraph 2.</p> >> </div> > > > Improperly nested tags will never validate. You can't have a bare > string inside the <head> tag like that, and <head> isn't a child of > <div>, so that won't work either. After correcting those errors, it > validates fine. > >> The above will not validate. Once you go one deeper in a nest, you >> cannot come back up just one level. You have to close the whole >> nesting. > > > Nope, this is completely untrue. > >> The above would work if changed to: >> >> <div> >> <head>Level 1</head> >> <p>Paragraph 1.</p> >> <div>Block o' text.</div> >> </div> >> <div> >> <p> Paragraph 2.</p> >> </div> > > > You're still producing invalid markup. Try something like this: > > <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" > "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd"> > <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" lang="en" xml:lang="en"> > > <head><title>Level 1</title></head> > <body> > <p>Level 1</p> > <div> > <p>Paragraph 1.</p> > <div>Block o' text.</div> > <p> Paragraph 2.</p> > </div> > </body> > </html> I fear that Mr. Desrosiers has made the classic error of confusing varieties of fruits, which is third only to "never become involved in a land war in Asia." and "never bet with a Sicilian when death is on the line." Mr. Hutchinson's code snippet was encoded using the TEI vocabulary of XML, not the XHTML vocabulary. In TEI the <head> tag is analogous to the HTML <h1> tag, and the HTML <head> tag is analogous to the TEI <teiHeader> tag. Apples and oranges. On the other hand, I don't see how Mr. Hutchinson's second example could validate if the first does not, particularly given the fact that DTD's are not structured in such a way to permit a validator to make that kind of a judgment ("if a <div> contains a <div> it must be the last element of the first <div>" or "if a <div> contains a <div> it may be preceded by a <p>, but not followed by one"). I'm not that great at deciphering DTDs, but I don't see anything in http://www.tei-c.org/P4X/DS.html which would cause me to believe that example 1 is not valid. In this particular case, I suspect a bug in the validator program. I mean, writing validators is hard, and I am aware of at least one bug in the W3C's online HTML validator. Supposedly, Xerces is a validating parser. Maybe I'll see if I can find the time to run the snippet through Xerces and see if (and where) it breaks.

2 1

Re: [gutvol-d] ANNOUNCEMENT: XML has hit the PG archives! (gutvol-d Digest, Vol
by Joshua Hutchinson 24 Aug '05

24 Aug '05

----- Original Message ----- From: "Lee Passey" <lee(a)novomail.net> > > Joshua Hutchinson <joshua(a)hutchinson.net> wrote: > > When in doubt, use <div>. I've learned the fear the <div> container. Let me show you why using a <div> container for "non-specific" blocks of text won't work. <div> <head>Level 1</head> <p>Paragraph 1.</p> <div>Block o' text.</div> <p> Paragraph 2.</p> </div> *** The above will not validate. Once you go one deeper in a nest, you cannot come back up just one level. You have to close the whole nesting. The above would work if changed to: <div> <head>Level 1</head> <p>Paragraph 1.</p> <div>Block o' text.</div> </div> <div> <p> Paragraph 2.</p> </div> *** The problem is that now you have two distinct blocks of text that should really be treated as one block. *** NOTE: None of this is to argue that the more correct way to handle the example you gave would be to mark it as something other than <p> chunks. You are right there. Just that your counter example of <div> wouldn't work at all. Josh

4 3

re: unluckily for us
by Bowerbird＠aol.com 24 Aug '05

24 Aug '05

lee said: > Unluckily for us, Bowerbird has not yet > released his algorithm for determining whether > a block of unstructured text is a paragraph. oh gee, i'm sorry. i thought i had. in z.m.l., anything surrounded by two or more blank lines is a paragraph. for counting purposes, this works just fine, even if your english teacher might not "approve" of it... a z.m.l. viewer-app will display the paragraph numbers, so there's absolutely no ambiguity about what they are... as long as the programs you are using count the same way, there's no reason to get strung out in definitional sand-traps. any more questions? -bowerbird

2 1

Re: [gutvol-d] ANNOUNCEMENT: XML has hit the PG archives! (gutvol-d Digest, Vol
by Joshua Hutchinson 24 Aug '05

24 Aug '05

----- Original Message ----- From: "David A. Desrosiers" <hacker(a)gnu-designs.com> > > > Dave, we're talking about TEI/XML. Nothing of what you said applies here > > (but you would be absolutely right on a HTML document, as I understand it). > > ;) > > Its not even well-formed XML, and fails XML validation (as the doctype shown > below shows). Perhaps the TEI/XML needs to start conforming. > > My example is perfectly legal XML. Follow the TEI DTD. Your example uses: <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd"> That is a xhtml1-strict.dtd. Completely different DTD and hence completely different set of markup rules. For instance, <head> means VERY different things and is used in VERY different ways between a TEI document and a XHTML document. Josh

1 0

Re: [gutvol-d] Re: prank someone is pulling
by Gutenberg9443＠aol.com 24 Aug '05

24 Aug '05

In a message dated 8/24/2005 1:09:05 PM Mountain Daylight Time, gbnewby(a)pglaf.org writes: Unfortunately, it's pretty easy to use our eBooks for this type of thing...including for SPAM emails. I agree. I told him that anybody in the world, anywhere in the world, can download our files and then use them in this way. I suspect he has annoyed someone who is using this means of revenge. But he was just about frothing at the mouth when he called, because he was convinced that it WAS somebody in our organization. It took a while to calm him down enough to listen to reason. Anne Do you like to breathe? Then save the trees! Begin a personal relationship with an ebook TODAY!

2 1

Re: [gutvol-d] ANNOUNCEMENT: XML has hit the PG archives! (gutvol-d Digest, Vol
by Joshua Hutchinson 24 Aug '05

24 Aug '05

Dave, we're talking about TEI/XML. Nothing of what you said applies here (but you would be absolutely right on a HTML document, as I understand it). ;) Josh ----- Original Message ----- From: "David A. Desrosiers" <hacker(a)gnu-designs.com> To: "Project Gutenberg Volunteer Discussion" <gutvol-d(a)lists.pglaf.org> Subject: Re: [gutvol-d] ANNOUNCEMENT: XML has hit the PG archives! (gutvol-d Digest, Vol Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2005 15:49:24 -0400 (EDT) > > > > I've learned the fear the <div> container. Let me show you why using a > > <div> container for "non-specific" blocks of text won't work. > > > <div> > > <head>Level 1</head> > > <p>Paragraph 1.</p> > > > > <div>Block o' text.</div> > > > > <p> Paragraph 2.</p> > > > > </div> > > Improperly nested tags will never validate. You can't have a bare string > inside the <head> tag like that, and <head> isn't a child of <div>, so that > won't work either. After correcting those errors, it validates fine. > > > The above will not validate. Once you go one deeper in a nest, you cannot > > come back up just one level. You have to close the whole nesting. > > Nope, this is completely untrue. > > > The above would work if changed to: > > > > <div> > > <head>Level 1</head> > > <p>Paragraph 1.</p> > > > > <div>Block o' text.</div> > > </div> > > > > <div> > > > > <p> Paragraph 2.</p> > > > > </div> > > You're still producing invalid markup. Try something like this: > > <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" > "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd"> > <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" lang="en" xml:lang="en"> > > <head><title>Level 1</title></head> > <body> > <p>Level 1</p> > <div> > > <p>Paragraph 1.</p> > > <div>Block o' text.</div> > > <p> Paragraph 2.</p> > > </div> > </body> > </html> > > > David A. Desrosiers > desrod(a)gnu-designs.com > http://gnu-designs.com > _______________________________________________ > gutvol-d mailing list > gutvol-d(a)lists.pglaf.org > http://lists.pglaf.org/listinfo.cgi/gutvol-d

2 1

Re: [gutvol-d] Re: prank someone is pulling
by Gutenberg9443＠aol.com 24 Aug '05

24 Aug '05

In a message dated 8/24/2005 10:36:42 AM Mountain Daylight Time, joshua(a)hutchinson.net writes: It is doubtful anyone that has anything to do with PG had anything to do with this. I agree. I told him that anybody in the world, anywhere in the world, can download our files and then use them in this way. I suspect he has annoyed someone who is using this means of revenge. Anne Do you like to breathe? Then save the trees! Begin a personal relationship with an ebook TODAY!

1 0

Re: [gutvol-d] Re: prank someone is pulling
by Joshua Hutchinson 24 Aug '05

24 Aug '05

Ann, this is called a FAX bomb. It is similar to a "e-mail bomb" where someone drops a bunch of e-mail garbage on someone to clog their e-mail account. It is usually someone who wants to "get back" at someone else. FAX bombs are especially nasty because then you are not only tying up their service, you are wasting tangible resources like paper and ink. The reason our file is being used is probably pretty simple ... we have great big text files that are easily accessible and work perfectly for this kind of griefing. It is doubtful anyone that has anything to do with PG had anything to do with this. Josh ----- Original Message ----- From: Gutenberg9443(a)aol.com To: gutvol-d(a)lists.pglaf.org, gbnewby(a)pglaf.org Subject: [gutvol-d] Re: prank someone is pulling Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2005 12:14:26 EDT > > TO ALL: > > Someone purporting to be from PG has faxed a book, in Finnish, the name of > which is > "Fredrika Runeberg," to the state of New Jersey Surveying Office. Whoever > did it somehow managed to get around the requirement that the sender's name > and > telephone number is to be on the first page of all faxes. I have assured him > that nobody in our organization did it. He wanted to fax the first page to > me but my fax is down right now, and I wanted him to mail it as an attached > file but he doesn't have a scanner. Therefore, he has lost the 33 sheets of > paper that were in his fax machine and is afraid to try to reuse the fax > machine > because it will immediately try to go on printing. (I told him to turn it > off, unplug it, then replug it and turn it on, and he would probably then be > able to use the fax machine normally.) > > He didn't give me his name other than "Jim." I have his telephone number but > will release it only to Greg. > > I have asked him to snail mail me the first page and let me see what I can > find out. > > If anybody on this ML is the culprit, cease and desist and notify me > personally that you did it. Then I will only bite your head off, spit it into > your > face, and then turn it over to Greg. > > If anybody on this ML is the culprit and does not admit it and gets caught, > that person's ass is grass and that person will be permanently barred from > this ML and everything else I can get him barred from. This conduct is > unconscionable. > > Anne > > Do you like to breathe? > Then save the trees! > Begin a personal relationship > with an ebook > TODAY! > > > _______________________________________________ > gutvol-d mailing list > gutvol-d(a)lists.pglaf.org > http://lists.pglaf.org/listinfo.cgi/gutvol-d

2 1