On Sat, Nov 13, 2004 at 01:30:44AM -0800, David Newman wrote:
Marcello Perathoner wrote:
The best value for Academia (and the least work for us) would be just to include the page scans. Any transcription you make will fall short of the requirements of some scholar. I think we should use our time for producing more books for a general audience instead than producing Academia-certified editions of them.
It occurred to me that some people might think that page scans are forbidden or not welcome. While it's true that we don't have many (any?) eBooks with full page scans, we *are* willing & able & ready to take them. Jim Tinsley did a 'howto' on the page scan naming convention (that is the hard part - so people know what they're called and where to find them). The post-10K directory structure, created over a year ago, includes the notion of a subdir for scans. DP has been invited to submit scans along with their texts. Maybe this word has not gone out sufficiently. Like with the XML markup discussion, the question is not "if" but "how." The first folks to submit scans with their submitted eBooks will need to do some extra work to help figure out the best way to do it. The posting team will need to keep track of the large files involved. If someone has the scans for a completed eBook, now would be a good time to work on getting them online. My estimate from early 2004 was that this would have grown the PG collection by an extra terabyte or so if we did it all through 2004. We haven't, and so this growth hasn't happened. But other than needing to deal with the extra space (which is trivial for a small number of eBooks, but could be challenging for our mirrors and main distribution servers when done en masse), there's no impediment I know of to moving forward. -- Greg