gosh, so i check back in with him, once, to give him a chance to redeem himself, but i see jim is up to his usual disinformation... *** jim said:
But that is *not* what BB is *actually* talking about.
anyone who is depending on _jim_ to tell them what i am "actually" talking about will have some serious problems. even after years of explanations, jim still can't grasp it... jim acts like i don't want .html. or .mobi. or .epub. silly. i was arguing for _all_ formats before jim ever came here. and i'm showing everyone the easiest way to generate them, and maintain a library with a large number of e-books in it. and i say this in extremely clear language, with simple words, which even an average kid in the fourth-grade can understand. but jim? not.
Rather, BB is talking about trying to *force* all volunteers to do it his way
well -- "actually" -- jim, it's more accurate to say that i'm not _allowing_ either p.g. or d.p. the _opportunity_ to do it my way, because i don't share code with them or leave my demo apps up so they can continue using them. i've refrained from releasing stuff, just so d.p. won't have it. what i _am_ sharing is the idea itself, so they can use it to create a working system, and better tools, for themselves. the idea is very straightforward. convert your plain-text into all of the various derivative formats that you require. and while you've all been telling me that "it can't be done", i've been busy doing it, and gradually rolling out the proof. while simultaneously puncturing your pride, so you grew too stubborn to do anything but ignore the proof i present. so now i've proven it beyond any kind of reasonable doubt, but since your heads are all in the sand, you still disbelieve, and we record it here, so the future will know you're stupid. and you don't even seem to know you've been duped. -bowerbird
BB>and while you've all been telling me that "it can't be done", i've been busy doing it, and gradually rolling out the proof. Well, the "proof" if you want to call it that, lies at feedbooks, not zen-world. If people want the feedbooks style of generic formatting they can get that today, and do not have to wait for BB or PG to roll it out for them. But the reality is one can get much better formatting than feedbooks from Amazon.com for free, where Amazon takes the PG HTML and preserves much more of the HTML formatting, presumably by added something like pgepub.css, but containing more reasonable values for the CSS therein. And the result is a much more interesting read than what feedbooks offers. Not as interesting a read as PG offers -- when the HTML author at PG cares about small machines in the first place. The only problem is that when real-world customers pick up those other-formatted books at feedbooks or Amazon they don't realize that PG is where those books actually came from, so there isn't the possibility for those customers to step up and offer anything back, even if they wanted to. And, unfortunately, those customers aren't getting the full experience of what either the original book nor the PG HTML version has to offer, because the feedbook books and to a lesser extent the Amazon books, have had their formatting dumb-converted.
Heh Jim, You seem to like these other sites better, they give you what you want. WHY bother here? You do alot of lamenting, but produce very little constructive feedback. regards Keith. Am 06.02.2012 um 19:58 schrieb Jim Adcock:
BB>and while you've all been telling me that "it can't be done", i've been busy doing it, and gradually rolling out the proof.
Well, the "proof" if you want to call it that, lies at feedbooks, not zen-world. If people want the feedbooks style of generic formatting they can get that today, and do not have to wait for BB or PG to roll it out for them.
But the reality is one can get much better formatting than feedbooks from Amazon.com for free, where Amazon takes the PG HTML and preserves much more of the HTML formatting, presumably by added something like pgepub.css, but containing more reasonable values for the CSS therein. And the result is a much more interesting read than what feedbooks offers. Not as interesting a read as PG offers -- when the HTML author at PG cares about small machines in the first place.
The only problem is that when real-world customers pick up those other-formatted books at feedbooks or Amazon they don't realize that PG is where those books actually came from, so there isn't the possibility for those customers to step up and offer anything back, even if they wanted to. And, unfortunately, those customers aren't getting the full experience of what either the original book nor the PG HTML version has to offer, because the feedbook books and to a lesser extent the Amazon books, have had their formatting dumb-converted.
_______________________________________________ gutvol-d mailing list gutvol-d@lists.pglaf.org http://lists.pglaf.org/mailman/listinfo/gutvol-d
Keith> You do alot of lamenting, but produce very little constructive feedback. I have given positive feedback, you just don't like it, because you are working on a different agenda. My positive suggestion is that there is very little wrong in practice with most of the HTML which is submitted and therefor the sensible thing to do would simply be to fix that little part which is not working, rather than throwing all the volunteer's work away and starting fresh with some new master language that someone at PG invents, if only they could agree on anything. My positive suggestion is simply give people who care a way to fix the half dozen "formattos" that are screwing up the HTML code, just the same as WW'ers currently fix "scannos" when we find them. This isn't making "snowflakes" any more than fixing "scannos" is creating "snowflakes." The problem really isn't HTML, EPUB, or Kindles. Its process and politics.
O.K Let me re-iterate there is probaly nothing wrong with the HTML offered to PG, yet it is not excepted by PG. Also, not all HTML mark up can be used in ebooks. Somethings simply do not work others poorly. PG has a master format. The big question is how to make it better. I am not interrested in creating a new mark up, but setting up guides and specification so that those that do offer HTML can and one can be certain it will be excepted. That is why I have started ANA. Maybe someone will come with a better mark up. Maybe someone will come up with better tools, but if you do not know the input you can create good output. Furthermore, sure, you HTML can be used to make good looking for a particular display/device. But, it fails when one uses the abilities of the devices to change font, sizes, margins, justification, etc. Here again here is where ANA is to help. regards Keith. Am 06.02.2012 um 23:11 schrieb James Adcock:
Keith> You do alot of lamenting, but produce very little constructive feedback.
I have given positive feedback, you just don't like it, because you are working on a different agenda.
My positive suggestion is that there is very little wrong in practice with most of the HTML which is submitted and therefor the sensible thing to do would simply be to fix that little part which is not working, rather than throwing all the volunteer's work away and starting fresh with some new master language that someone at PG invents, if only they could agree on anything. My positive suggestion is simply give people who care a way to fix the half dozen "formattos" that are screwing up the HTML code, just the same as WW'ers currently fix "scannos" when we find them. This isn't making "snowflakes" any more than fixing "scannos" is creating "snowflakes."
The problem really isn't HTML, EPUB, or Kindles. Its process and politics.
Keith>Furthermore, sure, you HTML can be used to make good looking for a particular display/device. You would have to examine my HTML before you could make that conclusion. The "Real Problem" is what to do about the HTML code being submitted by DP, where many of their DP HTML coders have strongly held feelings that they really do not want to change what they have been doing. If you want to change PG, you have to be willing to work with DP to find common ground. Because I don't see any chance in heck that PG is going to start rejecting that which DP submits. PG can afford to get pissy with independent producers like myself, but there is no way PG can afford to get pissy with DP. Where you *can* make a contribution is by figuring out exactly where things are going "wrong" and make suggestions of how with as little impact as possible those things could be "made right" without annoying the HTML coders at DP too much. And even then realistically what you want to suggest would have to be along the lines of "recommendations" rather than "requirements" on DP HTML coding. You might start by taking a good hard look at guiguts.
In fact, I seem to recall that this recent avalanche was partly triggered by a request posted to this forum for exactly such assistance from the current developer of guiguts. Now *there's* a low signal to noise ratio. ......
You might start by taking a good hard look at guiguts.
_______________________________________________ gutvol-d mailing list gutvol-d@lists.pglaf.org http://lists.pglaf.org/mailman/listinfo/gutvol-d
participants (5)
-
Bowerbird＠aol.com -
don kretz -
James Adcock -
Jim Adcock
-
Keith J. Schultz