Hi All, Lets discuss features. We need to describe the structures to be found in a book and those that need be addressed. A Note for the light weight or zero marker uppers this specification will tend to lean towards a middle weight mark up feature set. Why. Well, because it eases the handling of certain features. E.g quoting, more of that when we discuss it. It does not mean you have to do it as is discussed in this approach, but you will see the benefit as far as computational value is concerned. 1) Encoding and Character Sets 2) Fonts, Font Sizes and Character formating 3) Indentation 4) Margins 5) Page Numbers 6) Line Endings and Spacing 7) Table of Contents & other Tables of 8) Indices 9) Images 10) Chapters 11) Paragraphs 12) Quotes and quoting 13) Lists 14) Tabular Features (regular tables) 15) Page Headers 16) Page Footers 17) Footnotes 18) Multi-Column Layout Did I miss something important? regards Keith
First, to confirm, are you aiming for a context-free display markup with as little syntax as possible? On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 11:28 AM, Keith J. Schultz <schultzk@uni-trier.de>wrote:
Hi All,
Lets discuss features.
We need to describe the structures to be found in a book and those that need be addressed.
A Note for the light weight or zero marker uppers this specification will tend to lean towards a middle weight mark up feature set.
Why. Well, because it eases the handling of certain features. E.g quoting, more of that when we discuss it. It does not mean you have to do it as is discussed in this approach, but you will see the benefit as far as computational value is concerned.
1) Encoding and Character Sets
2) Fonts, Font Sizes and Character formating
3) Indentation
4) Margins
5) Page Numbers
6) Line Endings and Spacing
7) Table of Contents & other Tables of
8) Indices
9) Images
10) Chapters
11) Paragraphs
12) Quotes and quoting
13) Lists
14) Tabular Features (regular tables)
15) Page Headers
16) Page Footers
17) Footnotes
18) Multi-Column Layout
Did I miss something important?
regards Keith
_______________________________________________ gutvol-d mailing list gutvol-d@lists.pglaf.org http://lists.pglaf.org/mailman/listinfo/gutvol-d
My point as well. See my previous post with a completely off-the-cuff list One I'm working with right now would be something like <date>1400 B.C.</date>. On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 1:35 PM, Lee Passey <lee@novomail.net> wrote:
On Mon, February 6, 2012 1:15 pm, don kretz wrote:
First, to confirm, are you aiming for a context-free display markup with as little syntax as possible?
It looks to me like a mish-mash of both.
Personally I'm looking for display-free markup with as /much/ syntax as possible.
_______________________________________________ gutvol-d mailing list gutvol-d@lists.pglaf.org http://lists.pglaf.org/mailman/listinfo/gutvol-d
Hi Lee, join in the discussion. Nothing is written in stone yet. One of the goals is to provide support for output and another is to be able to match the original. Furthermore, it is to be a master so there will be more in there than necessaraly need of all outputs. regards Keith. Am 06.02.2012 um 22:35 schrieb Lee Passey:
On Mon, February 6, 2012 1:15 pm, don kretz wrote:
First, to confirm, are you aiming for a context-free display markup with as little syntax as possible?
It looks to me like a mish-mash of both.
Personally I'm looking for display-free markup with as /much/ syntax as possible.
_______________________________________________ gutvol-d mailing list gutvol-d@lists.pglaf.org http://lists.pglaf.org/mailman/listinfo/gutvol-d
Hi Don, I actually have not decided or actually thought about whether it should be context free or not. To be honest, it is to be a description of what should be marked up and what to consider and leave the implementation details to the mark up language. I was not planning on creating a mark up language nor a master format. I am not sure if i could get away with it. My gut feeling is that there will have to be some context sensitivity somewhere. This will not be a true specification in a software engineering sense. regards Keith. Am 06.02.2012 um 21:15 schrieb don kretz:
First, to confirm, are you aiming for a context-free display markup with as little syntax as possible?
Keith>Did I miss something important? Again, see: http://www.pgdp.net/c/faq/document.php and http://www.pgdp.net/c/faq/formatting_summary.pdf There are about literally 100 things that have to be accounted for in common book formatting, as DP has found out and cataloged.
Except that's DPs current markup. That's specifically what we need to remedy, including introducing syntactic markup. On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 1:53 PM, James Adcock <jimad@msn.com> wrote:
Keith>Did I miss something important?
Again, see: http://www.pgdp.net/c/faq/document.php and http://www.pgdp.net/c/faq/formatting_summary.pdf
There are about literally 100 things that have to be accounted for in common book formatting, as DP has found out and cataloged.
_______________________________________________ gutvol-d mailing list gutvol-d@lists.pglaf.org http://lists.pglaf.org/mailman/listinfo/gutvol-d
Don>Except that's DPs current markup. That's specifically what we need to remedy, including introducing syntactic markup. I certainly don't understand this statement. The variety of things one can find in the original book which are differentiated continue to need to be differentiated. Otherwise you are dumbing down the formatting, and throwing away information which was in the original book. You might want to rename the DP tags, but not sure how that is supposed to make a contribution?
Hi James, The question is what is on a page. What DP has done is add information which is not actually of the page of the book itself. Much of what they mark up is inferred from information not on the page. As an example I give you a chapter title. Many chapter headers do not say they are chapter titles. A human recognizes the chapter title/beginning by how it is represented on the page. This knowledge is in the human, not on the page. If you ever had the pleasure to read an original latin text, you would understand the importance of the knowledge a human requires in order to identify such structures as a sentence. the roman had no problem with this all so simply task. Yet, it takes years of experience of the students and experts of latin to master the written roman language. If you are a linguist and would love to discuss your opinion on if language constitutes meaning! To come back to formatting. I can live with fact that you and others consider our approach as a dumbing downing. But, for processing physical books through OCR to creating an actual ebook you do not need any semantic mark up at all from a computational view. You would be surprised what you can with language and a computer. It would make a linguistic proper toes curl. But the result is something he can not imagine to be possible or even figure out. regards Keith. Am 06.02.2012 um 23:31 schrieb James Adcock:
Don>Except that's DPs current markup. That's specifically what we need to remedy, including introducing syntactic markup.
I certainly don’t understand this statement. The variety of things one can find in the original book which are differentiated continue to need to be differentiated. Otherwise you are dumbing down the formatting, and throwing away information which was in the original book. You might want to rename the DP tags, but not sure how that is supposed to make a contribution?
_______________________________________________ gutvol-d mailing list gutvol-d@lists.pglaf.org http://lists.pglaf.org/mailman/listinfo/gutvol-d
Hi James, Sorry I do not care about what DP has done or thinks should be done. I had look at DP years ago and headed in the other direction almost immediately. You will see that there is pretty not much more need to be considered from purely layout put of view. regards Keith. Am 06.02.2012 um 22:53 schrieb James Adcock:
Keith>Did I miss something important?
Again, see: http://www.pgdp.net/c/faq/document.php and http://www.pgdp.net/c/faq/formatting_summary.pdf
There are about literally 100 things that have to be accounted for in common book formatting, as DP has found out and cataloged.
_______________________________________________ gutvol-d mailing list gutvol-d@lists.pglaf.org http://lists.pglaf.org/mailman/listinfo/gutvol-d
Keith>I had look at DP years ago and headed in the other direction almost immediately. Well, in practice DP is your customer, so I'm not sure how you are hoping to accomplish anything.
Hi Jim, Like I have written several times now. ANA is for PG. If DP finds value in what the result of ANA, then that would be added benefit and prove its value. regards Keith. Am 07.02.2012 um 00:49 schrieb Jim Adcock:
Keith>I had look at DP years ago and headed in the other direction almost immediately.
Well, in practice DP is your customer, so I'm not sure how you are hoping to accomplish anything.
_______________________________________________ gutvol-d mailing list gutvol-d@lists.pglaf.org http://lists.pglaf.org/mailman/listinfo/gutvol-d
participants (5)
-
don kretz -
James Adcock -
Jim Adcock
-
Keith J. Schultz -
Lee Passey