On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 12:33 PM, James Adcock <jimad@msn.com> wrote:
And they want TEI and not some silly home-brewed HTML.
And then they claim their semantic analysis entitles what they just did to new copyright status. And then they lock that TEI up in digital vaults that only other academics in their same consortium can even look at.
PG should become concerned when people say they are doing semantic analysis, and are not simply typesetting a book.
No. It's none of PG's business how other groups handle their transcribing. Tearing other people down doesn't get anything done. If people say they are doing semantic analysis, and decide to lock up, there's no point in us caring one way or the other; we may as well treat it as if it had never been done in the first place. If they are doing semantic analysis and are making it available to the world, why on Earth would we want be jerks and cop an attitude because other people doing semantic analysis are doing things we don't approve of? -- Kie ekzistas vivo, ekzistas espero.