Any "mechanism" is informal, at best, and there's no list of old submissions that would benefit from being re-done. To use as an example, Arizona Sketches, by J. A. Munk, PG#756. Internet Archive has a number of source copies. In 2008, I cleaned up PG's text file, made corrections, and created an HTML version. It's missing all illustrations, any Latin1 characters, and so forth. If the only intent is to correct a current PG etext, the corrected text and HTML files can be sent to PG's Errata system. Do not reformat the files, so that the corrected ones can be compared to the posted ones. It might take a few days for the WWers to deal with such submissions, but they *will* be dealt with. However, if you want to add illustrations, or any other material that may be missing from the posted files, you'll have to submit a copyright clearance for the source edition, do whatever is needed to add the missing material to the posted files, do a thorough check/correction of those files from the source, then upload everything as normal, mentioning in the Note to Whitewashers field that the submission is intended as an update to an existing etext. The WWers will decide whether to post the new submission as a new etext, or to replace (and archive) the existing files. If the latter is chosen, the original submitter's credit will be added to the new version's Credit line. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jim Adcock" <jimad@msn.com> To: "'Project Gutenberg Volunteer Discussion'" <gutvol-d@lists.pglaf.org> Sent: Saturday, February 20, 2010 3:48 PM Subject: [gutvol-d] Re: Many solo projects out there in gutvol-d land?
.... but there's currently no mechanism except for the Whitewashers, a.k.a. Errata Team, to fix this kind of thing. (Probably simpler to just re-do this text from scratch, which is something *I'm* not about to do.)
OK, HOW ABOUT a mechanism for fixing and/or improving things that were done in the past that now look old and crufty by today's standards? -- whether redoing something originally created by DP or by a solo? Certainly WW shouldn't be the only way to fix old cruft. If someone wants to take on a "redo and improve" what does it take? Many of the things that actually get read at PG are pretty old and crufty! -- I haven't been willing to take on any of the Ye Olde Cruft for fear of pushback.
_______________________________________________ gutvol-d mailing list gutvol-d@lists.pglaf.org http://lists.pglaf.org/mailman/listinfo/gutvol-d