dakretz said:
Great news! Let's test this thesis. ... etext # 200, dated "1995-01-01". ... Can anyone from DP tell me how to get the scans?
ok, two things... first, it looks like i was wrong when i said that d.p. had stopped maintaining the "ols", so of course my "reason" for their having stopped maintaining it was also incorrect. (or one could say it's _no_longer_ correct, but i do believe it was correct at one time.) at any rate:
it claims 16,809 "unique books". whether that means 16,809 scansets, i do not know. but the scans for pg#31946 are right there, online... second, the scan-sets from the very earliest books were said to be "inconvenient to get to right now" at one point in time. whether they were located or lost to the wind, i don't know. but that _could've_ included pg#200. the lowest p.g. numbers which are shown as being included in "ols" presently are pg#460 and pg#464, and four without any number. but are you sure that d.p. actually digitized pg#200? -bowerbird
Interesting page - I've never seen it before. Wonder what it's for? The Britannica projects I can actually find fall into two groups. 1. The group where I can't see the images because *Available Formats: Display of images from this source has not been
permitted.*
2. The group where I can see a page-at-a-time image viewer, by not a single image actually shows up. They all get that thing you get when there's a url, but the file is missing. So zero for sixteen or so. But I guess the intent was good. Maybe they are all working their way through a queue somewhere. On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 5:35 PM, <Bowerbird@aol.com> wrote:
dakretz said:
Great news! Let's test this thesis. ...
etext # 200, dated "1995-01-01". ... Can anyone from DP tell me how to get the scans?
ok, two things...
first, it looks like i was wrong when i said that d.p. had stopped maintaining the "ols", so of course my "reason" for their having stopped maintaining it was also incorrect. (or one could say it's _no_longer_ correct, but i do believe it was correct at one time.)
at any rate:
it claims 16,809 "unique books".
whether that means 16,809 scansets, i do not know. but the scans for pg#31946 are right there, online...
second, the scan-sets from the very earliest books were said to be "inconvenient to get to right now" at one point in time. whether they were located or lost to the wind, i don't know. but that _could've_ included pg#200. the lowest p.g. numbers which are shown as being included in "ols" presently are pg#460 and pg#464, and four without any number.
but are you sure that d.p. actually digitized pg#200?
-bowerbird
_______________________________________________ gutvol-d mailing list gutvol-d@lists.pglaf.org http://lists.pglaf.org/mailman/listinfo/gutvol-d
On the Open Library System, I note that high resolution gray-scale scans (at least for the one project I checked) are not archived, though the black and white scans are (though the example I checked, the Astounding Magazine scans were actually microfilm scans IIRC, which was a strange case but also what made the higher resolution scans helpful). I also note that there is no 'bulk' download function to get a zip of all the files associated with a text. But then again, something is better than nothing. Kevin On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 7:35 PM, <Bowerbird@aol.com> wrote: SNIP
first, it looks like i was wrong when i said that d.p. had stopped maintaining the "ols", so of course my "reason" for their having stopped maintaining it was also incorrect. (or one could say it's _no_longer_ correct, but i do believe it was correct at one time.)
at any rate:
SNIP
-bowerbird
On Tue, 20 Apr 2010, Kevin Pulliam wrote:
On the Open Library System, I note that high resolution gray-scale scans (at least for the one project I checked) are not archived, though the black and white scans are (though the example I checked, the Astounding Magazine scans were actually microfilm scans IIRC, which was a strange case but also what made the higher resolution scans helpful). I also note that there is no 'bulk' download function to get a zip of all the files associated with a text.
In the interest of having the high-res raw gray scans available I put them on the Internet Archive before they went to DP. -- Greg Weeks http://durendal.org:8080/greg/
participants (4)
-
Bowerbird＠aol.com -
don kretz -
Greg Weeks -
Kevin Pulliam