On 10/10/2012 6:55 AM, James Adcock wrote:
Your ideas for using xhtml "class" to mark semantics (which I do not disagree with the concept) then has the problem that many [x]html tools which volunteers may want to use to tackle the job don't support your "class" semantics. Thus volunteers are stuck using your tools, or generic text editors such as notepad++.
Every XML/HTML editor I am familiar with has the ability to set attributes on elements. An editor without that capability is pretty much worthless. It takes a little bit of effort, but I can even make Microsoft Word do it. If volunteers choose to use tools that make their job harder, I can do nothing about it. But selecting an inadequate markup scheme just because it's hard to use your preferred tools otherwise, is as big a mistake as deciding to support only markup-free text because some volunteer, somewhere, might not understand markup. There are lots of volunteers out there in the world, and if someone decides not to participate because it's too hard for him/her I'm sure they can find some other worthy cause--perhaps Distributed Proofreaders, where things have been made even simpler than is possible.
What, in practice do the WW'ers do when presented with what looks like an otherwise acceptable xhtml which doesn't have your "class" semantics?
Don't know, don't care. In the system I envision the WW priesthood would be defrocked. I don't think the answer is to reform the current PG system, I think the answer is to replace it.
What should DP do to implement this?
Whatever it needs/wants to. Project Gutenberg Next Generation creates an archive, creates a catalog, and creates a standard for how documents need to be structured. If DP wants to participate, it can just meet the standards like everyone else. Maybe it can develop some processes that can make this happen better than an individual volunteer, maybe it can't, maybe it's just not interested. Their problem, not mine. In any case, I suspect the focus of PGNG would be PG1000, which is the top 1000 most popular books at Project Gutenberg. Distributed Proofreaders (and Project Gutenberg as well) has consistently demonstrated resistance to upgrading e-texts already in the archive, preferring instead to produce such in-demand works such as _The History and Antiquities of Horsham_ instead of fixing _Huck Finn_. I doubt that DP would have any interest at all in this project.