ok, let's see if i can clear the decks here,
so i can get to some serious work next week...
***
a while back, michael intimated that i was
talking out of my ass when i speak of errors
in the p.g. library, and that i should have sent
_him_ the reports, so here is supporting data...
***
first is a piece i wrote on errors in the p.g. copy
of "swiss family robinson", _still_ all uncorrected...
> http://snowy.arsc.alaska.edu/bowerbird/2005cleanup/on_swiss_family_robinson
(this error-report was posted two full months ago.)
***
second is a new review of the "fixes" in "the secret garden":
> http://snowy.arsc.alaska.edu/bowerbird/2005cleanup/the_secret_garden_fix_analysis
this was a "re-do" of a book that was already in the p.g. library,
so i was able to test my ideas on comparing dual digitizations...
i have previously written on this project, in a gutvol-d message
that was sent december 27th, shortly after the e-text was posted.
in that message, i praised the accuracy, and noted 10 errors...
this new post examines subsequent treatment of those errors.
error-reports like this tend to get _very_ specific, so i've also
posted the page-images online to help outsiders negotiate:
> http://snowy.arsc.alaska.edu/bowerbird/2005cleanup/page000.jpg
replace "000" in that u.r.l. with the page-number (zero-filled to 3 digits)
to see the image-scan of each page as it's discussed in the error-report...
in a nutshell, though, i reported 10 errors, and just 2 were fixed!
this in response to a carefully-prepared error-report that gave you
the page-number, the incorrect text, and the necessary correction,
written only after i had taken a _very_ close look at each page-scan...
how many error-reports will you get that are so well-documented?
yet a mere 2 out of the 10 reported errors were actually fixed! wow!
is that a performance that you all believe that you can feel proud of?
***
third, i talked about how "alice in wonderland" was
_very_close_ to z.m.l. compliance, but _not_there_...
sorry, my memory was just a little wrong, there are
_3_ excessive linebreaks in alice30.txt (not just one,
as i had reported), one before each of these lines:
> CHAPTER I
> CHAPTER II
> `Thank you, it's a very interesting dance to watch,' said
of course, a linebreak that is "excessive" by z.m.l. standards
is probably not something the _whitewashers_ will consider
as an "error" that they need to "fix", but michael said that
he wanted to know about such things, so i have told him...
***
my messages were written in the course of ongoing
threads, the first over on the bookpeople listserve,
the second two right here. so all of these reports
hit michael's e-mailbox. if you have any questions,
do please feel free to ask them. otherwise, i will just
sit back and wait for y'all to make these corrections...
no need for a flame-war, though. i am convinced that
you'll never build a better error-correction system, so
somebody else (like me) will have to build one instead,
and i'm prepared to do that... so save your energy...
***
you will hear more from me starting on monday.
which is appropriate, since tinsley likes to call me
a "monday morning quarterback". heck, over on
the d.p. forums, he's got it down to its acronym...
get used to it, jim, you'll be hearing a lot from me,
with _extensive_ demos, starting real soon now...
-bowerbird
p.s. if jim's thinly-veiled insults persist over at d.p.,
i'll have to start posting in those forums in response;
is that _really_ what you guys want? think about it...