Bowerbird's development schedule and the $200K he's demanding [Re: [gutvol-d] re: blogs in e-books]
As for your doing a demo, hey, be my guest. OSoft and others have long since carried out the basic concept of shared annotation, and the SA-capable dotReader is on the way from OSoft. Of course I'm actually concerned that your demo would hurt the cause of shared annotations by showing it off less than optimally, whether it was brower- or reader-based or both. And you're not going to have the related standards infrastructure that dotReader will. Who knows, you might even want to give us, er, "lock-in." Now, back to some grubby details from the ZML world, such as the rival reader app that you've spent so many hours trolling for--against OpenReader. What's your development schedule for your reader, so we can guard against "hype" and "vaporware"? Isn't true you've taken forever to get your reader out? And beyond people not paying you $200K or whatever, how come you won't share the source code for your rival reader? Are you ashamed of it? I still don't have a satisfactory answer. Code can be dear to one's heart, but still is a long way from poetic musings. Why must you keep your brillance to yourself? Don't you believe in open source? Answer those questions, and then I suggest that we wind down this thread in the interest of bandwidth and time--both mine and others'. PG people are very welcome to write me privately or phone me--especially Greg, if he's really serious about the comments he made to U.S. Today extolling interactivity. Here's PG's chance to adopt a powerful format (OpenReader) and enjoy readers worthy of it (dotReader and in the future FBReader). I'm all ears as far as suggestions from Greg or anyone else, and I know others will be as well. David Rothman | davidrothman@openreader.org | 703-370-6540 OpenReader: http://www.openreader.org OR's first implementer: http://www.dotreader.org TeleBlog: http://www.teleread.org/blog
On Tue, May 23, 2006 at 04:07:06AM -0400, David H. Rothman wrote:
.... PG people are very welcome to write me privately or phone me--especially Greg, if he's really serious about the comments he made to U.S. Today extolling interactivity. Here's PG's chance to adopt a powerful format (OpenReader) and enjoy readers worthy of it (dotReader and in the future FBReader). I'm all ears as far as suggestions from Greg or anyone else, and I know others will be as well.
I enjoyed reading those quotes, and they're pretty accurate from an interview I did a few weeks ago concerning launch of the newest Sony eBook reader with electronic ink. (I was just in Tokyo two weeks ago, and was unable to find one of these units for sale. I didn't look all that hard, but peered closely in the PDA section of Bic Camera which is a huge electronics chain store). They somehow recycled the article for USA Today -- nice to see. Of course I'm serious about limitations of eBook readers, and am against any format that is one-way, closed, non-fixable/editable, etc. This is a thread in the "about" essays Michael and I worked on: http://www.gutenberg.org/about , with a key theme being "unlimited distribution." For the OpenReader format, as Marcello said there is no conceptual resistance to using this as a "convert to" format at gutenberg.org, just as plucker is. All we need is a clear and preferably open source processing chain that we can insert into the ibiblio.org site. Also, of course, a reasonable support community so that PG help staff (me, George & Marcello) don't end up being too challenged in supporting the format. In short, as you've heard before, you should feel encouraged to "go for it." -- Greg
Many thanks, Greg. Those are all extremely reasonable conditions, and I'll forward this to the appropriate folks, so they can be in direct touch with you. We're eager to work with PG/DP and blend in well with everyone's workflow. I also agree with you on the need for thinking through the support issues. You could share with us the lessons you've learned from Plucker. - David
For the OpenReader format, as Marcello said there is no conceptual resistance to using this as a "convert to" format at gutenberg.org, just as plucker is. All we need is a clear and preferably open source processing chain that we can insert into the ibiblio.org site. Also, of course, a reasonable support community so that PG help staff (me, George & Marcello) don't end up being too challenged in supporting the format.
In short, as you've heard before, you should feel encouraged to "go for it." -- Greg
On 5/23/06, Greg Newby <gbnewby@pglaf.org> wrote:
On Tue, May 23, 2006 at 04:07:06AM -0400, David H. Rothman wrote:
.... PG people are very welcome to write me privately or phone me--especially Greg, if he's really serious about the comments he made to U.S. Today extolling interactivity. Here's PG's chance to adopt a powerful format (OpenReader) and enjoy readers worthy of it (dotReader and in the future FBReader). I'm all ears as far as suggestions from Greg or anyone else, and I know others will be as well.
I enjoyed reading those quotes, and they're pretty accurate from an interview I did a few weeks ago concerning launch of the newest Sony eBook reader with electronic ink.
(I was just in Tokyo two weeks ago, and was unable to find one of these units for sale. I didn't look all that hard, but peered closely in the PDA section of Bic Camera which is a huge electronics chain store).
They somehow recycled the article for USA Today -- nice to see. Of course I'm serious about limitations of eBook readers, and am against any format that is one-way, closed, non-fixable/editable, etc. This is a thread in the "about" essays Michael and I worked on: http://www.gutenberg.org/about , with a key theme being "unlimited distribution."
For the OpenReader format, as Marcello said there is no conceptual resistance to using this as a "convert to" format at gutenberg.org, just as plucker is. All we need is a clear and preferably open source processing chain that we can insert into the ibiblio.org site. Also, of course, a reasonable support community so that PG help staff (me, George & Marcello) don't end up being too challenged in supporting the format.
In short, as you've heard before, you should feel encouraged to "go for it." -- Greg
_______________________________________________ gutvol-d mailing list gutvol-d@lists.pglaf.org http://lists.pglaf.org/listinfo.cgi/gutvol-d
On Tue, May 23, 2006 at 11:37:53AM -0400, David H. Rothman wrote:
Many thanks, Greg. Those are all extremely reasonable conditions, and I'll forward this to the appropriate folks, so they can be in direct touch with you. We're eager to work with PG/DP and blend in well with everyone's workflow. I also agree with you on the need for thinking through the support issues. You could share with us the lessons you've learned from Plucker. - David
I haven't learned any particular lesson from Plucker, which is probably good... Marcello might have some views on how things integrate. Mail to help@pglaf.org goes to me & George Davis...George answers most of them. We get 5 or so inquiries per day. Frustrations come from our .lit, .pdb and .mp3 files which, when broken our outdated, cannot be easily fixed. We get frequent requests to submit this and that format, including some people who do the work of conversion then send me files. Lots of PDF, but pretty well any format you can think of (.doc, etc.). For the most part I don't want to add such formats in static files to the PG collection, instead prefering conversion on the fly. The goal, as oft stated, is automated conversion to many formats from XML or HTML input. Several people have made great progress on this, and the XML production chain at DP is in pretty good shape....but we're not there yet. The current catalog/download interface at gutenberg.org is close to the ideal: just a few static files, then a selection of conversion options. Today, Plucker is the only one Marcello has available, but more can be added. Conversion to PDF, MP3 & Braille are at the top of my personal list. Not all input books or types can be reasonably accurately converted to any possible format, especially for the older titles with no well-formed & valid HTML version. (David Widger converts several dozen eBooks per week, minimum, to current standards.) -- Greg
For the OpenReader format, as Marcello said there is no conceptual resistance to using this as a "convert to" format at gutenberg.org, just as plucker is. All we need is a clear and preferably open source processing chain that we can insert into the ibiblio.org site. Also, of course, a reasonable support community so that PG help staff (me, George & Marcello) don't end up being too challenged in supporting the format.
In short, as you've heard before, you should feel encouraged to "go for it." -- Greg
On 5/23/06, Greg Newby <gbnewby@pglaf.org> wrote:
On Tue, May 23, 2006 at 04:07:06AM -0400, David H. Rothman wrote:
.... PG people are very welcome to write me privately or phone me--especially Greg, if he's really serious about the comments he made to U.S. Today extolling interactivity. Here's PG's chance to adopt a powerful format (OpenReader) and enjoy readers worthy of it (dotReader and in the future FBReader). I'm all ears as far as suggestions from Greg or anyone else, and I know others will be as well.
I enjoyed reading those quotes, and they're pretty accurate from an interview I did a few weeks ago concerning launch of the newest Sony eBook reader with electronic ink.
(I was just in Tokyo two weeks ago, and was unable to find one of these units for sale. I didn't look all that hard, but peered closely in the PDA section of Bic Camera which is a huge electronics chain store).
They somehow recycled the article for USA Today -- nice to see. Of course I'm serious about limitations of eBook readers, and am against any format that is one-way, closed, non-fixable/editable, etc. This is a thread in the "about" essays Michael and I worked on: http://www.gutenberg.org/about , with a key theme being "unlimited distribution."
For the OpenReader format, as Marcello said there is no conceptual resistance to using this as a "convert to" format at gutenberg.org, just as plucker is. All we need is a clear and preferably open source processing chain that we can insert into the ibiblio.org site. Also, of course, a reasonable support community so that PG help staff (me, George & Marcello) don't end up being too challenged in supporting the format.
In short, as you've heard before, you should feel encouraged to "go for it." -- Greg
_______________________________________________ gutvol-d mailing list gutvol-d@lists.pglaf.org http://lists.pglaf.org/listinfo.cgi/gutvol-d
participants (2)
-
David H. Rothman -
Greg Newby