- gutvol-d - lists.pglaf.org

re: [gutvol-d] one more thing, for jon noring
by Bowerbird＠aol.com 28 Feb '05

28 Feb '05

robert said: > English-language novels tend to go quickly. > If they qualify for the "easy" queue, > they spend little time queuing, and > often complete proofreading within a few days. when i said "fly through d.p. in a few hours" i meant literally, not figuratively. (well, i guess the "fly" part was figurative, :+) but the "few hours" part was quite literal, especially since first-time producers get to go to the head of the queue. go ahead, time it.) -bowerbird p.s. a text that is already this clean would most definitely be put into the "easy" queue. moreover, re-doing existing e-texts might be a very good test of the formatting rounds that are now being contemplated for the d.p. future. (of course, those are a complete waste of time, in my humble opinion, but they _are_ the plan...) p.p.s. robert, didn't you make a d.p. forum post that also listed a bunch of plain-text formats recently? or was that dazb? or someone else?

1 0

re: [gutvol-d] one more thing, for jon noring
by Bowerbird＠aol.com 28 Feb '05

28 Feb '05

jon said: > But there was a deadline to finish the first beta of the > cleaned-up text, so there was no time to have this done at DP. this text would fly through d.p. in a matter of hours... > and found over 200 differences but my comparison shows that most of those are minor, to the point of total insignificance to the average reader. when the focus is narrowed to meaningful differences, the number is less than 20. it is good to correct them -- and the less-significant ones too -- very good, but this is hardly a good example of an error-ridden e-text. > Unfortunately, since the 120-dpi scans are > antialiased greyscale (while the 600 dpi are bitonal), > the size difference is surprisingly not that different. > I updated the My Antonio index page to include > downloading all the 120-dpi scans in a ZIP file, > which is still over 30 megs in size: the .pngs on the website would seem to be much smaller. roughly 400 of those, at about 20k each, would be 8 megs. is my arithmetic wrong? or am i missing something? -bowerbird

3 2

[Fwd: Carl Ludwig Schleich/Inka Weide]
by Marcello Perathoner 28 Feb '05

28 Feb '05

Any DPers here that can get this msg to Inka? -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Carl Ludwig Schleich/Inka Weide Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 17:28:23 +0100 From: jp-com <jp-com(a)online.de> To: webmaster(a)gutenberg.org Hallo, please send this mail to inka weide. Hallo Inka, mit Freude habe ich auf Gutenberg die Aufsätze von Caarl Ludwig Schleich gelesen. Mehr über meinen Urgroßonkel findet man unter www.carl-ludwig-schleich.de Gruß Jürgen Pohl Eichenhain 13 D--31311 Uetze -- Marcello Perathoner webmaster(a)gutenberg.org

2 1

Filesystem changes to the web site
by Marcello Perathoner 28 Feb '05

28 Feb '05

At my request ibiblio is moving our site to the new file server. Our new Apache documentroot will be: /public/vhost/g/gutenberg/html/ our old documentroot was: /public/html/gutenberg/ The steps are: 1. (done) The new directory has been created and the old directory has been copied to the new directory. The new directory is accessible thru the development web server at: http://www-dev.gutenberg.org 2. (in progress) I will update the files in the new directory and test them. 3. ibiblio will switch the production server to the new directory. 4. ibiblio will delete the old directory. How does this affect you ? If you are editing files in /public/html/gutenberg/ you should copy your edits to the corresponding files in /public/vhost/g/gutenberg/html/. At least you should keep a list of which files you did edit so you can copy them over before we switch the production servers. -- Marcello Perathoner webmaster(a)gutenberg.org

4 8

Re: [gutvol-d] plain text formats [was: one more thing, for jon noring]
by Bowerbird＠aol.com 28 Feb '05

28 Feb '05

jon said: > It's also interesting that there's another ZML in use, > so Bowerbird may need to change the acronym he is using > for his regularized plain text schema, such as to ZenML: fat chance! somebody better warn the new interloper... ;+) interesting page, scott. (except i got a flock of 404s.) one of these days, no-markup markup is finally gonna hit its critical mass... my efforts are aimed at offline e-books, for which i am creating the viewer-app, so my "zen markup language" files aren't intended to be transformed into (x)html (who needs the hassle?), but read directly. the real noise will be about my _viewer_. the sizzle on the steak is that you feed it plain old text, and still get immense power. eventually i'll write a z.m.l. browser plug-in, but for now the more-important priority is to wean people off the browser for reading e-books. so i do not see myself as competing in any way with any of the other no-markup systems today. (nor do i see any of them as competition to me.) i also intend to be much simpler than any of them! -bowerbird

1 0

Re: [gutvol-d] plain text formats [was: one more thing, for jon noring]
by Jon Noring 28 Feb '05

28 Feb '05

Scott Lawton wrote: >> If I put up plain text, I want the plain text to follow >> some regularization rules, and ZML is the only game in town actively >> working with etexts (as far as I know at least -- I do recall two >> other text regularization schemas, but don't know if the authors are >> doing anything with them.) > There are several schemes in active use, including: > > wiki markup: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wiki_markup > > STX: http://www.zope.org/Members/jim/StructuredTextWiki/FrontPage > (Structured Text) by Jim Fulton, e.g. for Zope and ZWiki > > reStructuredText: http://docutils.sourceforge.net/rst.html for > Python's DocUtils > > Markdown: http://daringfireball.net/projects/markdown/ by John > Gruber of Daring Fireball Thanks! Markdown is especially interesting since it produces regularized plain text which looks and reads the most like PG plain text, other than Bowerbird's ZML. It's also interesting that there's another ZML in use, so Bowerbird may need to change the acronym he is using for his regularized plain text schema, such as to ZenML: http://rx4rdf.liminalzone.org/RhizML > (I'm not sure if any are being used for the same type of etexts as > PG, but it seems likely that the overall level and diversity of > activity and tools are more important. e.g. I think all of the > above include source code, typically using a friendly "attribution" > license.) > > My own approach (from 1995) plus links to several others is here: > No-Tags Markup: http://prefab.com/ssl/notagsmarkup.html Very useful information. Thanks. Jon

1 0

Re: [gutvol-d] one more thing, for jon noring
by Bowerbird＠aol.com 28 Feb '05

28 Feb '05

jon noring said: > Unfortunately I do not have OCR output did you do o.c.r. on it? if you can retrieve the output, that would be good. it would allow people to do research on assessing/improving o.c.r. quality, and assist programmers in developing post-o.c.r. text-cleanup programs. (but, from later posts, it looks like you grabbed the text from elsewhere. so what you've done is "blessed" somebody else's work as "trustworthy", presumably after checking it, and maybe correcting it. you could also have done that same thing using project gutenberg's version of the text, since my comparison of the two files shows them to be very similar, so much so that i expect they were indeed based on the same version.) > I'll zip up the 600 dpi 2-color (B&W) scans > which have already gone through a clean-up stage > (they will be PNG files, and occupy if memory serves me right, > about 50 megs of space those are too big for my purposes, and for me to download. but if i could reimburse you for sending them to me on a cd? or the 120-dpi versions would work just fine for my project, the same ones that are on the website, just zipped together. > Remind me if I don't answer anytime soon. sure thing. > Thanks. I look forward to it! (Really, I do.) great. -bowerbird

3 2

re: [gutvol-d] one more thing, for jon noring
by Bowerbird＠aol.com 28 Feb '05

28 Feb '05

jon said: > Most of the PNGs are in the 70-80k range yes, that was my mistake, sorry. i was misled by the .djvu version, where most of the pages are <10k. (i've _got_ to see how to use that!) of course, at 30 megs per book -- gosh, i remember when 30 megs was a good-sized _hard-drive_! :+) -- we see why project gutenberg has never put all its scans online. distributed proofreaders keeps _saying_ that they are going to, but as of yet, they haven't done it. d.p. still seems to be constrained by disk-space, even with generous help from ibiblio and internet archive. -bowerbird

4 5

Re: [gutvol-d] Pepys' birthday
by Gutenberg9443＠aol.com 27 Feb '05

27 Feb '05

In a message dated 2/23/2005 10:33:50 AM Mountain Standard Time, shimmin(a)uiuc.edu writes: In the US, a work first published in 1970 has a 95-year term, and won't hit the public domain until 2066. In the UK, posthumous works are no different than other works today, but that has only been the case since 1988. Before 1988, posthumous works got a 50-year copyright (2021). This may have been extended to 70 years since then (2041). So who is going to complain? There is a new edition as of about 24 years ago, which includes all Pepys's XXX comments that are omitted from the earlier edition. Anne

4 4

Good site
by N Wolcott 27 Feb '05

27 Feb '05

http://copac.ac.uk/ is a marvellous site I just discovered, at the University of Manchester, propbably already known to you experts. On it you can search all the combined british, scottish, and irish library catalogues at one time with results which can be sorted etc, downloaded in various formats, and saved. A real boon if you are looking for pre 1900 books. The expanded catalogue entries often have information as to pseudonyms publisher dates etc etc. N Wolcott nwolcott2(a)post.harvard.edu

1 0