Hmmm. I'm not quite sure understand your message,
Janice. (It's probably the heat muddling my brain). Am
I correct in thinking that you're asking us for a
little patience and that the problem is being worked
on, or that you're planning to put out a survey to all
members, volunteers or not, to see if anyone is
opposed to eliminating the stripper or if everyone
agrees that it doesn't seem to serve a function?
Certainly page numbers are important, and sometimes
when they're on the top line with the stripper they
get deleted, although my understanding is that that
isn't supposed to happen.
If indeed bookshare is doing something about the
stripper, either planning a survey as there have been
before or working on how to elliminate it, we can be
patient for a while longer -- but itis a problem that
has been discussed for at least a year that I
remember, and possibly longer (heat, again).
Cindy
-- Janice Carter <Janice.C@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Rui, despite your best efforts, you will always be
> special to
> Bookshare.org's ongoing growth and development.
> (Yes, I met Rui in
> person on numerous occasions at the NFB 05
> Conference.)
>
> We might ask that you give us a little more time to
> organize all of the
> great feedback we received at the past few
> conferences and submit to the
> larger group for additional comments and suggestions
> as we plan for the
> next year of Bookshare.org.
>
> Janice
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
> Behalf Of Rui
> Sent: Friday, July 22, 2005 3:28 PM
> To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Where are those
> contrarians?
>
> Hello:
>
> I would like to here from people who disagree with
> me.
> Let me know why you think the current setup makes
> sense.
>
> I do not mean for people to play devil's advocate
> with this.
> I'm asking if anyone seriously disagrees with the
> centiments expressed
> over
> the last 30 hours.
>
> (There is a method to my madness)
>
> -- Rui (who is probably liked at Benetech right now
> as much as the
> plague)
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Deborah Kent Stein" <dkent5817@xxxxxxx>
> To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Friday, July 22, 2005 6:26 PM
> Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: stripper and
> colatteral damage
>
>
> >
> > Dear Charlyn and Bookshare community,
> >
> > I think a petition is an excellent idea. Charlyn,
> would you like to
> put
> > it
> > together? Rui, would you put it on the Bookshare
> Scans site?
> >
> > I also think we should select a day to make phone
> calls and send
> emails to
> > the Bookshare staff calling on them to turn off
> the stripper. How
> about
> > Thursday, July 28, one week after this most recent
> stripper discussion
> > began.
> >
> > We need to take in the fact that, as Bookshare
> volunteers and users,
> we
> > must
> > have direct say on policy issues. Right now this
> list is virtually
> the
> > only
> > vehicle we have for reaching the staff, and it is
> clearly ineffective.
>
> > The
> > stripper issue highlights a need for a more
> formalized means of
> > communication. Maybe we should develop an
> advisory committee which
> can
> > bring concerns to the staff and have a real voice
> in policymaking.
> >
> > As blind people, most of us have grown up with the
> sense that we're
> lucky
> > to
> > get whatever reading matter is offered to us. We
> had better be
> > appreciative
> > and not complain. On the title page of every book
> from the National
> > Library
> > Service we read that the book has been produced
> for the blind and
> > physically
> > handicapped "with the kind permission of the
> publisher." That line
> about
> > "the kind permission" says so much! Do sighted
> people need anyone's
> kind
> > permission in order to read? I AM in fact
> extraordinarily grateful to
> the
> > volunteers and others who have spent countless
> hours putting books
> into
> > Braille and recorded formats for us, and to those
> who have worked to
> > change
> > copyright laws and make our special-format books
> possible! Most of us
>
> > would
> > not be literate, educated, contributing members of
> society without
> their
> > help! But I think that our lifelong dependence
> upon others to provide
> us
> > with books, and the constant feeling that we must
> be grateful and that
> we
> > can't expect too much, do take a toll.
> >
> > Bookshare is different. Bookshare is a program
> which is not only FOR
> us,
> > but BY us. We, the volunteers, determine what
> books go into the
> > collection,
> > and we ourselves make them available. We are not
> "only volunteers"
> who
> > have
> > no right to determine policy. We are the backbone
> of the program - a
> > program which is created to meet our needs and
> those of other blind
> and
> > print-disabled people. The Bookshare staff are
> not users of Bookshare
> > materials. They do not live with the
> inaccessibility of print; they
> don't
> > experience our issues from the inside. It is
> absolutely essential
> that
> > they
> > listen to what we have to say.
> >
> > Bookshare is an incredible program, and I believe
> in it utterly. It
> has
> > the
> > potential to narrow the print gap for us as no
> other program ever has
> > before. But we need to take a stand and insist
> that it be the quality
> > program we all deserve.
> >
> > Debbie
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Charlene" <caota@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Sent: Friday, July 22, 2005 12:11 AM
> > Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: stripper and
> colatteral damage
> >
> >
> >> Maybe we could put together a pteition of some
> sort and put a notice
> on
> >> the volunteer website as well to see if we could
> get enough people to
> >> sign it to send to bookshare requesting them to
> stop using the
> program.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >> [mailto:bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
> Behalf Of Pam Quinn
> >> Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 7:02 PM
> >> To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >> Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: stripper and
> colatteral damage
> >>
> >>
> >> We take pride in our submissions and I just don't
> think a lot of the
> >> bookshare staff understands how angry and
> frustrated we are when we
> see
> >> that our submissions have been mangled. And for
> what? I just don't
> get
> >> it. Why do they insist on holding on to that
> useless program that
> nobody
> >> wants? Seems to me if anything, dropping it would
> mean one less step
> and
> >> less work in putting the books on the site.
> >>
> >> I use chapter headings for my breaking points in
> .mp3 files too, when
> >> I'm lucky enough to have them.
> >>
> >> It might not be our decision and they might not
> want to listen to us,
> >> but that would be unfortunate, because the
> volunteers and subscribers
> >> have a major role in determining the future of
> bookshare.
> >>
> >> Pam
> >>
> >> Original message:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> >I have seriously considered not submitting some
> books I have scanned
> >> >just
> >> >because I thought they would be of little use
> after the stripper
> >> finished
> >> >with them. I put a lot of work in to what I
> submit and it is really
> >> >upsetting to see the final result when my
> original looked so nice,
> and
> >> that
> >> >is only a volunteer's view. I also am upset by
> the messes that I
> come
> >> >accross when I am reading, even for pleasure. I
> use the chapter
> >> headings
> >> >as my MP3 creation breaking points, so if they
> aren't there I have a
> >> big
> >> >mess!
> >> >
> >> >I don't really like throwing fits, and I won't
> on this list because
> it
> >> >seems to serve little purpose, but the fits are
> completely
> justified.
> >> >
> >> >If i submitted a book in DAISY and BRF format
> instead of in RTF
> would
> >> >the
> >> >normal automated processes be skipped? That is
> the only thing I can
> >> think
> >> >of to rescue books where the headers, headings,
> and page numbers are
> >> >invaluable.
> >> >
> >> >Sarah Van Oosterwijck
> >> >Assistive Technology Trainer
> http://home.earthlink.net/~netentity
> >> >----- Original Message -----
> >> >From: "Deborah Kent Stein" <dkent5817@xxxxxxx>
> >> >To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> >Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 7:10 PM
> >> >Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: stripper and
> colatteral damage
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> Hear, hear! I agree 200%!
> >> >>
> >> >> We have been telling the Bookshare staff about
> our concerns,
> politely
> >>
> >> >> but firmly, literally for years. Despite all
> the talk, nothing
> has
> >> >> changed. I am beginning to think we need to
> take stronger action.
> We
> >>
> >> >> ARE volunteers.
> >> >> We do not have to contribute the thousands of
> hours we put into
> this
> >> >> program. And Bookshare cannot survive without
> us. Do we need to
> say
> >> we
> >> >> will have to stop scanning and validating
> until we know that
> someone
> >> out
> >> >> there is really listening to us, and taking
> action? It should not
> >> have
> >> >> to
> >> >> come down to threats and strikes, but many of
> us are at our wit's
> >> end.
> >> >> What
> >> >> is it going to take to turn off the stripper
> and stop mangling the
> >> books
> >> >> we
> >> >> work so hard to make available?
> >> >>
> >> >> Debbie
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> >> From: "Rui" <goldwave@xxxxxxx>
> >> >> To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> >> Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 11:16 AM
> >> >> Subject: [bksvol-discuss] stripper and
> colatteral damage
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>> Good Afternoon:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> At the bookshare users meeting at NFB, I made
> it very clear to
> Jim
> >> >>> (like
> >> >> he didn't know already) the issues with the
> stripper and why i
> think
> >> >> it should be removed.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> The whole concept of the stripper bothers me,
> not just the fact
> it
> >> >>> does
> >> >> more than it's supposed too.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Its very reason for being agrivates me.
> >> >>> Regular print books have headers, some have
> footers, that is part
> of
> >>
> >> >>> a
> >> >> print book.
> >> >>> If we want digital copies of print books
> then, take the good with
> >> >>> the
> >> >>> bad.
> >> >>> Do not sanitize the book to make it more
> access technology
> friendly.
> >>
> >> >>> The
> >> >> very fact that is accessible already does
> that.
> >> >>> If i don't want to read the headers, i can
> strip them out myself
> or
> >> >>> use
> >> >>> my
> >> >> own automated tool to do so.
> >> >>> However, If by chance I do want them there,
> I simply do not get
> >> >>> that
> >> >> option with Bookshare!!!
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Words do not do justice to how much this
> issue ticks me off.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Bottomline, this process does not serve the
> community that it was
> >> >>> designed
> >> >> to assist.
> >> >>> -- Rui
> >> >>>
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > From: Mike Pietruk <pietruk@xxxxxxxxx>
> >> >>> > Date: 2005/07/21 Thu AM 11:00:39 EDT
> >> >>> > To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >> >>> > Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: stripper
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > Pam
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > agreed! It's inconsistent and
> unpredictable. And the problems
> >> >>> > relative
> >> >>> > to it have been discussed repeatedly.
> >> >>> > The Powers-that-be are all too aware of the
> damage the stripper
> >> has
> >> >> caused
> >> >>> > but seem to have shoved it on the back
> burner probably due to
> more
> >>
> >> >>> > pressing issues to deal with. It is a shame
> that it cannot be
> >> >>> > dealt with; but Marissa, prior to her
> leaving, pretty much
> >> >>> > outlined where it stands. So I wouldn't
> expect much change
> >> >>> > regarding the stripper as any change would
> require some sort of
> >> >>> > policy change plus programmer action.
> Conceptually, the
> stripper
> >> >>> > makes sense; practically, it has been a
> >> >> dismal
> >> >>> > failure breading as much (or perhaps even
> more) than it has
> >> >>> > repaired. It's not our decision as we are
> volunteers, not
> >> >>> > decision-makers.
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> --
> >> >> No virus found in this incoming message.
> >> >> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> >> >> Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.9.2/52
> - Release Date:
> >> 7/19/2005
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
