the wings of the dove -- 002
as i said, one of the first steps in doing our little mash-up is to sync up the paragraphs. in doing so, i found a half-dozen mistakes that jim had made in the paragraphing... for others who want to verify these errors, i suggest you look directly at jim's #29452:
in addition, i'll give you the u.r.l. to see the actual scans for each page up on my site... *** in 3 cases, jim missed a paragraph break:
Her response, when it came, was cold but http://z-m-l.com/go/wotdjp026.html
She put it as to his caring to know http://z-m-l.com/go/wotdjp263.html
There was a finer http://z-m-l.com/go/wotdjp317.html
*** in another 3 cases, jim incorrectly broke an existing paragraph into two paragraphs.
This was, fortunately for her http://z-m-l.com/go/wotdjp123.html
What queerer consequence http://z-m-l.com/go/wotdjp181.html
It just faintly rankled in her http://z-m-l.com/go/wotdjp201.html
*** 6 paragraphing mistakes is not bad performance. with a book containing some 330 pages, like this, i would say that it's probably about an average job. *** besides, my point is never to say "gotcha! errors!" as super-proofer jose menendez has proven, i make my fair share of book-digitizing errors. so that's not the point. there are several big issues that _are_ the point: 1. comparing digitizations is a great way to pinpoint errors so that they can be corrected. i have made this point in repeated examples. 2. most of the books in the library have errors. even the best ones, which were done recently... if you're convinced there are no errors there, you just don't know how to find them, and i strongly suggest you return to the first point. 3. most of the p.g. e-texts will be used only to proof scan-sets that retain the book's structure, and then the p.g. e-text will simply be discarded, since it doesn't contain that important structure. 4. the p.g. plain-text format has a lot of power and beauty inside it, if it's merely extended a bit, which is precisely what i did when i created z.m.l. -bowerbird
Thank you Bowerbird, again, for making my points for me: 1) If I had submitted this book instead to DP there would have been a much larger number of punc errors introduced as "required" by the DP process. 2) We would all still be waiting for this book, because I prior submitted two books to DP after a considerable amount of work on my part and they have still to see the light of day. Someone with a practical knowledge of queuing theory needs to go over these issues with DP. 3) I know perfectly well that errors remain unseen, which is why I would like an input file format that easily allows another motivated volunteer to pick up where I left off when my children start complaining that they are unfed and unclothed and "reality calls" -- besides which by the time I am "done" with a book like "Dove" I am splitting blood and ready to do something else for a while -- rather than listening to Bowerbird insult my efforts and insult my integrity simply because I do not support his favored hack markup schemes -- which no one else wants to support either.
On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 2:30 PM, Jim Adcock <jimad@msn.com> wrote:
Thank you Bowerbird, again, for making my points for me:
No, he's not, because nobody is listening to him. I considering killfilling you, too, because I no more want to hear from Bowerbird by proxy than directly. Stop complaining about what he does; he's a troll, he enjoys it. Just stop reading his messages. -- Kie ekzistas vivo, ekzistas espero.
Jim, I would suggest that if you're spitting blood by the time you finish a book that you're going at it too fast/forcefully. Slow down--there are no deadlines at PG. Re bowerbird - ignore him/it. Few, if any, aspects of PG (or DP) satisfy him/it, while little, if anything, that him/it does, satisfies anyone else. Al ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jim Adcock" <jimad@msn.com> To: "'Project Gutenberg Volunteer Discussion'" <gutvol-d@lists.pglaf.org> Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2009 11:30 AM Subject: [gutvol-d] Re: the wings of the dove -- 002
Thank you Bowerbird, again, for making my points for me:
1) If I had submitted this book instead to DP there would have been a much larger number of punc errors introduced as "required" by the DP process.
2) We would all still be waiting for this book, because I prior submitted two books to DP after a considerable amount of work on my part and they have still to see the light of day. Someone with a practical knowledge of queuing theory needs to go over these issues with DP.
3) I know perfectly well that errors remain unseen, which is why I would like an input file format that easily allows another motivated volunteer to pick up where I left off when my children start complaining that they are unfed and unclothed and "reality calls" -- besides which by the time I am "done" with a book like "Dove" I am splitting blood and ready to do something else for a while -- rather than listening to Bowerbird insult my efforts and insult my integrity simply because I do not support his favored hack markup schemes -- which no one else wants to support either.
_______________________________________________ gutvol-d mailing list gutvol-d@lists.pglaf.org http://lists.pglaf.org/mailman/listinfo/gutvol-d
participants (4)
-
Al Haines (shaw) -
Bowerbird＠aol.com -
David Starner -
Jim Adcock