On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 1:00 AM, Keith J. Schultz
<schultzk@uni-trier.de> wrote:
Hi All,
Let me see if I understand this right.
6 Rounds of work is done just to be worked over so that text
and HTML versions can be created and the final result
is published.
Why, in goods name is it not done the other way around !!
Get a clean text and HTML version and then and all the
googly goop after words. Sure would save alot of time.
I know DP knows above markup, but have they ever
heard about pseudo-code/markup.
regards
Keith.
Am 14.02.2010 um 21:47 schrieb don kretz:
You'd think it would be obvious, wouldn't you?
When DP started, here was the basic process as far as the
participants were concerned.
1.) A person takes a page of text and a picture of the text,
plus a mediocre online text editor and some guidelines for
follow, and tries to get the text to match the picture.
2.) A second person takes their work and the same picture
and guidelines, and tries to make it better.
3.) The system strings the text files together and hands
them off to PG to publish.
Clean, simple, and most importantly it provides each person
with the immediate and obvous positive gratification of
seeing their work self-evidently closing the gap between
the text and the picture.
Now, almost all the process has been so completely
decomposed and constrained that almost all the oppportunity
for gratification shows up for a little bit to the first proofer (who
still must not do *too much* to make it look like the picture,
i.e. format it); maybe the first formatter (if there's even much
left to do), and supremely and finally, gloriously, the Post
Processor (whose name is associated semi-eternally posted
with their work.)
There's a whole lot more that can be said (is is said, in the
DP forums, loudly, into the vastness of space), about how
it got to be this way, and how happy people are about it,
and what might be done. These are not dumb people, even
though the work seems to have become dumb work.
But there's the picture in a nutshell.