One wonders about how wwers distinguish between calling a submission a "correction" (and presumably altering the existing distribution), and calling it a "new version" and giving it a new number with zero distribution credibility. If it's derived from the old version with the intent to only make corrections, is there a threshold number of corrections beyond which it becomes a new version with all the attending discredit? If I also add markup in addition to corrections, does that make it a new book number, or a new format for the old one? Seems like the original contributor could be presumed to have implicitly authorized, indeed welcomed, corrected versions as replacements, regardless of the magnitude of the resulting change. Don From: Jon Hurst Sent: 9/25/2012 4:27 AM To: gutvol-d@lists.pglaf.org Subject: Re: [gutvol-d] blah blah blah blah blah On 2012-09-25, Bowerbird@aol.com wrote:
I would also like to do a LaTeX version, so will need a stage before you add your formatting -- it doesn't have to be my RTT, but the lines need to correspond.
i'm just mounting the projects.
somebody else will have to clean the text.
and add the formatting.
i mean, i _might_ do some of that stuff, but i'm not making any guarantees that i _will_...
but i doubt i will. i have bigger fish to fry...
also, i think it's silly not to add the formatting, so you'll have to _remove_ any that i've added. (but that would strike me as immensely stupid, because then you'll just have to add it back in.)
So here we have a demonstration of the exact set of problems that I was trying to solve. You don't want to clean the text, due to your big fish frying activities. I don't particularly want to spend my (admittedly fishless) limited time cleaning the text either. Pretty much everyone on this list doesn't want to clean text that is not for their own solo project. There are 1000 odd people who will be glad to clean text for you and know what they are doing, but they live at PG and if you want to play there, you have to play by their rules. Greg has a hose full of people that will clean text for you, but if he turns it your way, you will have to train them first, and in your case you will not just have to train them to check that the word in the text is the same as the word in the image, you will have to train them in all things ZML as well. I don't want to start from your ZML. I'm sure ZML is lovely, but I want to work from the corrected text and images where the number of introduced errors is lowest. That is my preferred workflow, and I'm not prepared to compromise on it. Consider it a religious thing, that I am going to be utterly unreasonable about, and that nothing you say will ever change my mind on it. A workflow can go from RTT to ZML very easily, but the reverse is not necessarily the case. That was the point of the RTT. If you mandate that what comes out of your system is ZML and only ZML, then I'm not interested in working within your system. Finally, unless I am reasonably convinced that something useful will come of it, I am not going to proofread word 1. Useful means default PG download and that, at the very least, means preferred PG edition, and the existence of some sort of default download protocol. Posting a small selection of books on your own site while laudable means pretty much nothing at all in the grand scheme of things. So... we agree on the necessity of master scans, we agree that a default download protocol is a requirement before it is worth commencing any work. Let's narrow our focus to these two seemingly simple items. With these in place, people can roll up their sleeves. Maybe some will do redos as solo projects, maybe some will do them through your system, maybe one of the DP's can help make some RTTs. Without them, it is simply not worth starting anything... which you may recall was what I was trying to determine right at the start of all this dialogue, and more or less the first piece of advice you gave me. Cheers Jon _______________________________________________ gutvol-d mailing list gutvol-d@lists.pglaf.org http://lists.pglaf.org/mailman/listinfo/gutvol-d