David Starner wrote:
First, I subscribe to the mailing list; please don't CC me.
Then you should set a reply-to header so my mailer knows you don't want to get the answer to your mail. Reply-To: Project Gutenberg Volunteer Discussion <gutvol-d@lists.pglaf.org> This is a perfect example for burdening your work onto other people's shoulders, like we will presently see another one. Why should I have to remember your wishes and manually delete your address every time I answer to one of your posts when there is a perfectly standard way for you in which you can configure your mailer so it happens automatically.
You're missing the point; I don't want to do the work by hand. You're the one that wants me to do the work.
I want you (the publisher) to do some more work, so thousands of people (your readers) will have less work to do.
If there is an error reported on page 634 I don't want to "flip through the pages", I want the right page to open in the first time.
Ask them to cite the image page number.
So everybody who wants to report an error has to install the djvu plugin and browse thru the file until they match the real page number with the imaginary one and then report the imaginary one? This is absurd, as the real page number is right there in the html file for everybody to see. This is not the way PG should treat people who want to help PG by reporting errors.
So what's the point of worrying about deep linking to images if we're not permitting deep linking to images?
The point is that we may want to deep link to the page images from our site (which works, otherwise you wouldn't be able to read illustrated books online). Furthermore the probability that deep links to the djvu file will crop up in weblogs by the thousands (like it used to happen for deep links to our images) is negligible, because not so many people will have the djvu plugin installed to make this technique feasible for bloggers. The danger of being /.ed by bloggers is minimal for djvu files so there is no reason to restrict access.
And frankly, it's not rightly so. It's a pain that I couldn't toss a link to an image and have people not be able to see it depending on their email program. Maybe it's a nessicity, but it makes it hard to refer to specific images online.
Why don't you just download the image and attach it to the mail? -- Marcello Perathoner webmaster@gutenberg.org