Thanks for posting Pater Filucius by Wilhelm Busch (http://www.gutenberg.org/1/4/3/4/14340). Unfortunately, the m-dash treatment is wrong--spaces are missing. Is this a common problem for texts prepared by DP-PG? -- http://www.gnu.franken.de/ke/ | ,__o | _-\_<, | (*)/'(*) Key fingerprint = F138 B28F B7ED E0AC 1AB4 AA7F C90A 35C3 E9D0 5D1C
On Wed, 5 Jan 2005, Karl Eichwalder wrote:
Thanks for posting Pater Filucius by Wilhelm Busch (http://www.gutenberg.org/1/4/3/4/14340). Unfortunately, the m-dash treatment is wrong--spaces are missing. Is this a common problem for texts prepared by DP-PG?
For quite a while now, it has been considered a PG standard to have no spaces around an emdash. I have wondered before if there is a call for treating this differently in various languages. I remember clearly an exchange of email with a new white-washer about spaces around emdashes in a German text I was submitting. I was arguing that many other German texts in PG and other places seemed to have the spaces; he was arguing that the files should be prepared "to standard" before being submitted. Andrew
Andrew Sly <sly@victoria.tc.ca> writes:
I remember clearly an exchange of email with a new white-washer about spaces around emdashes in a German text I was submitting. I was arguing that many other German texts in PG and other places seemed to have the spaces; he was arguing that the files should be prepared "to standard" before being submitted.
Something along these line I read, too. But I thought the post-processors or white-washer would use a special switch to prepare German texts more like traditional German texts ;) For HTML I prefer "xyz — zyx" instead of "xyz--zyx". -- http://www.gnu.franken.de/ke/ | ,__o | _-\_<, | (*)/'(*) Key fingerprint = F138 B28F B7ED E0AC 1AB4 AA7F C90A 35C3 E9D0 5D1C
Hi all, It's Jared :) I'm a college student down here in California, and I've been with PG for some time as a DP and more recently as one of the newsletter editors. Prof. Hart and I have been talking about (by email) the possibility of reviving the old directory structure (ie etext 03, etext94, etc) as perhaps a classic PG website or at least an alternative site for users to browse etexts the way they did before, with the etexts organized by year. It's the structure I am most used to, and in discussions with Hart and Greg Newby, I believe a project of this scale can be undertaken (to create a separate site housing the etexts under the old directory structure. Prof. Hart also tells me there has been some discussion on this issue on the mailing list recently, but I only just joined the gutvol list a few days ago. Perhaps someone wouldn't mind filling me in on what I missed? Jared Buck ---------------------- Project Gutenberg editor http://www.gutenberg,net
Jared Buck wrote:
Prof. Hart and I have been talking about (by email) the possibility of reviving the old directory structure (ie etext 03, etext94, etc)
Revive it? It still seems to be alive. E.g., http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/etext03/ http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/etext94/ But I suppose these are unsatisfactory for your purposes because they're gradually dwindling, as their texts are (refurbished and) reposted under the new directory structure. Eventually, they'll be empty.
as perhaps a classic PG website or at least an alternative site for users to browse etexts the way they did before, with the etexts organized by year.
So: 1) Would this site exclude the post-10k texts (which never had a home in the old structure)? 2) Would it maintain separate copies of the texts, or merely simulate the old structure, providing hyperlinks into the new structure (or the new catalog) for the actual texts? 3) If it maintains separate copies, would it track changes to the corresponding texts in the new structure?
Prof. Hart also tells me there has been some discussion on this issue on the mailing list recently, but I only just joined the gutvol list a few days ago. Perhaps someone wouldn't mind filling me in on what I missed?
Hm. If he's thinking of the gutvol-d mailing list, and within the last few months, then the only thing I can find that's somewhat relevant is the discussion re Folio files. See the archives for December. (Click the link in the boilerplate at the bottom of the message.)
Jared Buck ---------------------- Project Gutenberg editor http://www.gutenberg,net
(You might want to change that comma to a dot.) -Michael
So: 1) Would this site exclude the post-10k texts (which never had a home in the old structure)? 2) Would it maintain separate copies of the texts, or merely simulate the old structure, providing hyperlinks into the new structure (or the new catalog) for the actual texts? 3) If it maintains separate copies, would it track changes to the corresponding texts in the new structure?
1. Yes, it would likely exclude the post-10k texts but would link to the newer versions posted once we reached the 10-k format. 2. I'm not sure which way we're gonna go, separate text copies sounds the best way to me, with links to the newer versions so users always know where they can find the latest version of a particular etext. 3. Didn't I just explain this? And thanks for pointing out the signature snafu, I didn't realize i had a comma in there, LOL. Jared Buck ---------------------- Project Gutenberg editor http://www.gutenberg.net
participants (4)
-
Andrew Sly -
Jared Buck -
Karl Eichwalder -
Michael Dyck