It's also possible that the P3er was responding appropriately by responding mindlessly to a process that encourages and rewards mindlessness. (Saying that more diplomatically, a system that encourages rote memorization and application of universal rules rather than thoughtful consideration of the text in the light of the available context.) What's ironic is that the second easiest way to handle it is to let the postprocessor (or is that post-processor? let's say post-*processor. See what I mean?) use the available tools to simply list all the cases where hyphenated and dehyphenated versions of the same word appear in the text, check a page image, see which was actually used (I bet it's the most frequent), and fix 'em all at a stroke. The first easiest way is to do this before posting the project in the first place. Then let the instructions say those dreaded DP words: "It doesn't matter,", reducing the cognitive distinctions and requirements between new proofers and old proofers. Somehow this concept is always a non-starter unfortunately, especially among the old proofers who get to write the rules. On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 6:19 PM, Karen Lofstrom <klofstrom@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 3:12 PM, James Adcock <jimad@msn.com> wrote:
Because 1) I have seen some P3s change EVERY hyphen to a check-hyphen. 2) As a PP I have attempted to "fix" check-hyphens and to do so one has to try to understand what it was that the P3 was complaining about. I've emailed some and said "what were you thinking?" and they say "oops, you're right, I was basically thinking that I wished the hyphen wasn't there."
Those are folks who don't understand the rules. You ran into some bad P3ers; that doesn't mean that all of us in P3 are like that.
You could have *corrected* the misconceptions, rather than deciding that we're all idiots.
-- Karen Lofstrom not an idiot (at least in THIS area) _______________________________________________ gutvol-d mailing list gutvol-d@lists.pglaf.org http://lists.pglaf.org/mailman/listinfo/gutvol-d