[bksvol-discuss] Re: Nuking Fair submissions

 Mary, you made good points.

Guido, you have some good points, too. I'm correcting
a supposedly Fair copy of Johnny Tremain that really
should have been rated Poor, it's so bad. I keep
telling myself that it would be faster to scan it and
then prevalidate it, but I can't bring myself to do
that. I know I'm probably wasting time because I think
my scan would have fewer mistakes, but . . . no I feel
guilty because I'll have one book to send up istead of
four (smile).

But the missing words in the books I was talking about
would never have been noticed if I hadn't been reading
the books. There were no spaces in the sentences to
indicate that a word or several wre missing or that
words were the wrong ones. It was only in the reading
that I could tell something was wrong -- didn't make
sense -- and then I could check the book to see what
the correct word should be. In some cases it was what
I would have put in if I didn't have the book, but in
other cases it was something different -- not that it
would have made a big difference to the reader.

I suggested that the person who submitted all those
txt Fair files that aren't getting validated download
and reject them herself and resubmit them as rtf
files. I assume she has the originals and could
convert them to rtf before submitting them, and I'd be
willing to validate them, since I've gathered from
discussions here, as well as their popularity in the
general population, that people do enjoy them for
light reading, but as far as I know that hasn't been
done.

Cindy


                
__________________________________ 
Do you Yahoo!? 
All your favorites on one personal page ? Try My Yahoo!
http://my.yahoo.com 

Other related posts: