re: Re: [gutvol-d] I'm sorry but I don't get it...
all of this is just to resubmit a plea that i have made before (and will _continue_ making until i get a positive response!) for information about the name and location of graphic-files to be included in the _plain-text_ versions of the e-texts...
And now it is no longer a plain-text file. With the added penalty of having no existing validators to make sure that the markup used is done correctly. Basically, you're reinventing the wheel for no purpose here. Josh
Actually, I took bowerbird's plea to mean simply that he wanted *some* indication in a plain text version of where images appeared, and which image was used. E.g.: text text [image: xyz.gif] text text This would not seem to be too much to ask, and I think Lynx will do this if you use the -dump option to save HTML as plain text. Incidentally, at what point did the world decide to indicate italics by placing underscores before and after text? The canonical usage used to be to use a forward slash (solidus), / to indicate italics, and underscores to indicate underlining. (And * to indicate bold.) Steve Joshua Hutchinson wrote:
all of this is just to resubmit a plea that i have made before (and will _continue_ making until i get a positive response!) for information about the name and location of graphic-files to be included in the _plain-text_ versions of the e-texts...
And now it is no longer a plain-text file. With the added penalty of having no existing validators to make sure that the markup used is done correctly.
Basically, you're reinventing the wheel for no purpose here.
Josh _______________________________________________ gutvol-d mailing list gutvol-d@lists.pglaf.org http://lists.pglaf.org/listinfo.cgi/gutvol-d
-- Stephen Thomas, Senior Systems Analyst, Adelaide University Library ADELAIDE UNIVERSITY SA 5005 AUSTRALIA Tel: +61 8 8303 5190 Fax: +61 8 8303 4369 Email: stephen.thomas@adelaide.edu.au URL: http://staff.library.adelaide.edu.au/~sthomas/
Steve Thomas wrote:
Actually, I took bowerbird's plea to mean simply that he wanted *some* indication in a plain text version of where images appeared, and which image was used. E.g.:
text text
[image: xyz.gif]
text text
This would not seem to be too much to ask, and I think Lynx will do this if you use the -dump option to save HTML as plain text.
Sure, it isn't hard. But neither is HTML markup for the same thing. [img src="xyz.gif"] And this has the added benefit of being parse-able (is that a word?) by a whole slew of already existing validators, link-checkers, editors, etc. It isn't that what bowerbird proposes is impossible to do. It's that it's already been done, and arguably better than he'll do it, simply because there are YEARS of development and more people than I can count behind HTML. ZML has bowerbird and nothing (so far) to show for it. The bi problem with how bowerbird defines plain text (basically, ASCII letters with some markup for italics, bold, images, etc) also fits HTML/XML. But he claims that HTML/XML don't qualify as plain text. What exactly is different about them? Complexity? Hardly. HTML can be QUITE simple. If all you want is to mark italics, bold, and images, HTML is ridiculously simple. Josh
Josh, I can't argue with you -- I've spent years marking up plain text into HTML, because I believe that HTML provides a superior ebook to plain text. (Others may feel free to disagree -- just don't tell me about it.) But PG seems wedded to the idea that there must always be a plain text version, and if we're going to create a plain text from an HTML with images, then where's the problem with retaining at least the location of the images in the plain text? Steve Joshua Hutchinson wrote:
Steve Thomas wrote:
Actually, I took bowerbird's plea to mean simply that he wanted *some* indication in a plain text version of where images appeared, and which image was used. E.g.:
text text
[image: xyz.gif]
text text
This would not seem to be too much to ask, and I think Lynx will do this if you use the -dump option to save HTML as plain text.
Sure, it isn't hard. But neither is HTML markup for the same thing.
[img src="xyz.gif"]
And this has the added benefit of being parse-able (is that a word?) by a whole slew of already existing validators, link-checkers, editors, etc.
It isn't that what bowerbird proposes is impossible to do. It's that it's already been done, and arguably better than he'll do it, simply because there are YEARS of development and more people than I can count behind HTML. ZML has bowerbird and nothing (so far) to show for it.
The bi problem with how bowerbird defines plain text (basically, ASCII letters with some markup for italics, bold, images, etc) also fits HTML/XML. But he claims that HTML/XML don't qualify as plain text. What exactly is different about them? Complexity? Hardly. HTML can be QUITE simple. If all you want is to mark italics, bold, and images, HTML is ridiculously simple.
Josh _______________________________________________ gutvol-d mailing list gutvol-d@lists.pglaf.org http://lists.pglaf.org/listinfo.cgi/gutvol-d
-- Stephen Thomas, Senior Systems Analyst, Adelaide University Library ADELAIDE UNIVERSITY SA 5005 AUSTRALIA Tel: +61 8 8303 5190 Fax: +61 8 8303 4369 Email: stephen.thomas@adelaide.edu.au URL: http://staff.library.adelaide.edu.au/~sthomas/
I forward this message, appeared on PG-EU: Carlo ------------------------------------------------------------------------ From: "Branko Collin" <collin@xs4all.nl> To: pg-eu@vrijschrift.org Priority: normal X-Virus-Scanned: by XS4ALL Virus Scanner Subject: [PG-EU] Daisy and Gutenberg Sender: pg-eu-admin@vrijschrift.org Reply-To: pg-eu@vrijschrift.org Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 01:09:34 +0200 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.64 (2004-01-11) on posso.dm.unipi.it X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.8 required=2.5 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=2.64 The following is more of a gutvol-d subject, but I am no longer subscribed there, so I'll post it here. Vrijschrift was kind enough to get a seat reserved for a Project Gutenberg volunteer at the Symposium for Alternative Models for Copyright, and Wiebe gave me that seat. At the symposium, drs. Maarten Verboom of FNB (<http://www.fnb.nl/sub_home/english.html>, subtitle: "literature and information for people with a reading disability") gave a talk, which I did not get to hear, because I had to go and visit a prospective customer. However, afterwards I did chat with his colleague, Arne Leeman. I asked him whether they knew of Project Gutenberg ("yes, definitely"), whether they are using our texts ("Yes", though not many), and whether there are things we could do to make things easier for them. Actually, there is, and that is publishing books in Daisy (an XML application specifically geared to speaking books). I told him that that may not be the XML standard we will be ending up with, to which he replied that any XML would be better than plain vanilla text, especially richer mark-up, because it could make texts easier to convert to Daisy. I also invited FNB to send us requests for public domain books they like to see digitized. (I seem to remember that there are content providers at DP who take requests.) -- branko collin collin@xs4all.nl _______________________________________________ PG-EU mailing list PG-EU@vrijschrift.org http://mailman.vrijschrift.nl/listinfo/pg-eu
Hello. You can find more information about DAISY including conversion tools below. I think that the html books could be converted fairly easily since they include headings already. http://www.daisy.org/ I think there is a free converter but I'm not sure. I know most of them are commercial.
participants (4)
-
Carlo Traverso -
Joshua Hutchinson -
Steve Thomas -
Tony Baechler