On Thu, 16 Dec 2004, Joshua Hutchinson wrote:
You know, it's like you're deliberately trying to make me angry!
Sweeping it under the carpet is exactly what you are promoting here.
NO ONE HAS SUGGESTED SWEEPING IT AWAY!
Again: Sweeping it under the carpet is exactly what you are promoting here.
In fact, every person that has suggested a change of some kind has advocated putting the obsolete format document somewhere accessible. Just not right out in front where an uninformed visitor will see it, click it and get frustrated. It reflects poorly on PG as a whole and turns off potential users from ever coming back.
It this were the case, lots of people would have complained by now. You are insiders. . .you have a distinctly different viewpoint.
Move the bloody thing into the OLD subdirectory. That's what the OLD subdirectory is for. Use it as such.
Again: Sweeping it under the carpet is exactly what you are promoting here.
Is the text version we have the exact same document as the folio version or where they created from separate sources? If it is the same, we should move the folio into the text's etext number and free up a number. If they are from separate sources, can any somehow generate a text file from the Folio file we have?
This is exactly the reason for having a separate number, so people will NOT get the .nfo format unless they want it. BTW, you can still get the Folio reader with the TIME Magazing CDs which sell for $1.
Josh
----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael Hart" <hart@pglaf.org> To: "Project Gutenberg Volunteer Discussion" <gutvol-d@lists.pglaf.org> Subject: Re: !@!Re: [gutvol-d] [Fwd: Folio files] Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 07:09:51 -0800 (PST)
On the one hand people complain that eBooks in general will never last, simply because those big gov't databases were kept in formats no one can read today. . .on the other hand you don't want this to be mentioned up front. . . .
None of the people arguing this case were there when we met with the President of Folio, none of them were part of doing Gibbon's "Roman Empire" . . .so please just leave it be.
Some day, when you are all gone, perhaps someone else will sweep your efforts under the carpet. . .and Google will go down as the inventor of eBooks and the first eBook library.
On Wed, 15 Dec 2004, D. Starner wrote:
From the standpoint of an archivist, I have to fall on the side of keeping all file formats available and accessible to the reader. PG is as much a historical catalog as it is a library.
Since when? Why?
If we want to teach people about the death of old formats, maybe we should have a page about old formats, and how WordStar and Folio and other formats were da bomb, and how it's hard to find anything that can read them now. If they come across them in a search, how will they even know that it's an old format nobody can read? For all I would have known before this discussion, you could run out and buy an ebook reader that takes Folio, or download a program to read them.
Remember that it's not just proprietary formats that die; I seem to remember code to read WordStar files in one of my old programming books, and there's a bunch of open source programs where you'd have to go through old CDs to find a version of the program that could read your files. -- ___________________________________________________________ Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm
_______________________________________________ gutvol-d mailing list gutvol-d@lists.pglaf.org http://lists.pglaf.org/listinfo.cgi/gutvol-d
_______________________________________________ gutvol-d mailing list gutvol-d@lists.pglaf.org http://lists.pglaf.org/listinfo.cgi/gutvol-d