Re: !@!Re: [BP] Google Print vs. The Open Library vs. Project Gutenberg
In a message dated 11/22/2005 4:42:07 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, hart@pglaf.org writes: I can only hope there is something WE can do to keep these ideals-- such as they are--alive and thriving so WE can have our own eBooks, or own eLibraries, the way WE want them. Everybody's "gonna" do powerful things but they don't. Meanwhile we could run PGLAF for a hundred years with what they're frittering away. After checking out the Open Library site, I sent it a "nastygram."Their plan is unworkable. Their security is nonexistent. It would take them about a thousand years to save five thousand books the way they save now, and I don't know anybody that can spare six gb for ONE book. Forget the pretty. Most people want the words. Gaaahhh. Anne
On 11/23/05, Gutenberg9443@aol.com <Gutenberg9443@aol.com> wrote:
I don't know anybody that can spare six gb for ONE book.
I could, for one book, even now. I remember one critical edition that showed a comma or period in full color blown up 10 times to show that it was actually a broken comma, not a period. I've had times when I've been looking at my own scans and had a hard time telling noise from punctuation. I want a chance to check this without having to have a hardcopy of the book in hand.
Forget the pretty. Most people want the words.
If we're here for what most people want, I think we can pretty much retire. I can think of a couple things we're missing, but not in plain text. One of the things I've been missing from PG is scans of line-art pictures in high-enough quality to make reuse possible. Instead of buying a Dover art book, I should be able to dig through the PG archives to find a suitable picture.
participants (2)
-
David Starner -
Gutenberg9443＠aol.com