[ntnm] Re: feedback trial 3
- From: "Derek Hornby" <derek.hornby_uk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <ntnm@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 16:38:23 +0100
Do you think we will end up with a system that only the
Computer experts can manage to read!
I feel everyone's skills, abilities, needs to be taken in to account.
It's like Braille books production.
Both grade one and grade two is usually offered.
Why offer grade one?
It's so that those that cannot manage grade two
Are still able to read a Braille book!
So in the case of the news papers a-technic newsreader
And also "guide" both need to be on offer as was the case
With TNA UK
Regards, Derek
-----Original Message-----
From: ntnm-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ntnm-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of Huw Evans
Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2014 4:12 PM
To: ntnm@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [ntnm] Re: feedback trial 3
Here is a copy of my feedback to trial 3:
Thank you for the 'New Scientist' on 20 May. It is, of course, a most
interesting and weighty magazine.
I believe the only practicable way of tackling it involves using both
versions, relying on the html's contents and then searching within the tex
version as necessary. Neither version, in my view, is satisfactory on its
own - the html being unsearchable and the text lacking a contents and
numbered sections. While it is possible to cope with the magazine in this
clumsy manner, it is a retrograde step when compared with the ease with
which the text version could be read in the past.
Am I correct in saying that apart from the fact that each is presented as a
single item only, these do not differ from the corresponding versions of the
'Sunday Times', which you sent in the second trial?
Best wishes,
Huw Evans.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Derek Hornby" <derek.hornby_uk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <ntnm@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, May 17, 2014 12:36 PM
Subject: [ntnm] Re: comment on news papers and magazine"improvements"
Well I hope they do a fix so that a-technic newsreader works.
Derek
-----Original Message-----
From: ntnm-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ntnm-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of Isaac Porat
Sent: Saturday, May 17, 2014 7:23 AM
To: ntnm@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [ntnm] Re: comment on news papers and magazine"improvements"
Hi Huw and list
In reply to your question, purely from a technical point of view there
are in my mind two main issues:
1. Creating by the automatic system well structured publications as
opposed to page based publications as they are now.
This will allow easier navigation as we were accustom to while reading
the TNAUK publications. It should be emphasized that this is
independent of the actual format be it HTML epub or text, structure is
structure. Of course a structured publication can have page information
too for those who wants it as it was with the TNAUK format.
2. Supplying The '.doc' TNAUK format.
Personally I think well structured publications are essential for
efficient and pleasant reading experience. There are however readers
with minimal computer skills and for those structure will make little
difference if all one knows is to read line by line and perhaps jump
from one article to the next.
Again personally I will not miss the '.doc' format, moving to well
recognized international formats is a good thing of course if there are
reading systems out there to take advantage of these. To read HTML in
principle all you need is a browser and any text editor will read text
of course if these are not well structured than reading is hard work.
As I mentioned previously on this thread structuring publications is a
lot more difficult than what RNIB is doing at present which means
programming investment in the automatic system which costs money and
takes time.
Deserved or not RNIB is known for 'top down, we know what is good for
you approach.
Will the survey be an exercise in political correctness or a genuine
attempt to resolve the problem I don't know. However, there is a new
top management in the media and solutions sections lets see what they
can do.
Regards
Isaac
n 16/05/2014 21:44, Huw Evans wrote:
> Hi Isaac,
>
> I'm wondering whether there are any technical (non-financial) reasons
> why RNIB cannot provide the service we were accustomed to get from
> Tnauk and whether you are prepared to
>
> comment on this.
>
> My belief is that recent events have established that our needs as
> newspaper and magazine readers differ fundamentally from our needs
> when reading books and that distinct separate non procrustean
> arrangements are needed for providing a satisfactory service. Now
> that our needs are more clearly understood, I have no doubt that the
> RNIB would be concerned to provide us with such an obviously valuable
> service and that it would be an wonderful complement to the talking
> books service.
>
>
>
> I believe the coming May consultation exercise should be regarded as
> part of the planning procedure and that all users should be given an
> opportunity to consider all options (i.e. including the tnauk type
> presentation). RnIB should then be prepared to go back to the drawing
> board, obtain any necessary expert advice and make appropriate
> adjustments to allocations of resources and budgets.
>
> Huw.
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Isaac Porat" <isaac@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: <ntnm@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Friday, May 16, 2014 9:33 AM
> Subject: [ntnm] Re: comment on news papers and magazine"improvements"
>
>
>> Hi
>>
>> I was involved with the TNAUK computer systems as a volunteer so I
>> have some knowledge how these things work...
>>
>> You are right and wrong.
>>
>> Most of the newspapers and very few magazines come from the
>> association NLA feed so in theory (and mostly in practice) they can
>> be produced like sausages automatically and therefore cheap to produce.
>>
>> Most of the magazines are complex, have lots of none relevant
>> graphics, come in complex formats and need to be produced manually
>> and therefore there is a cost (if I remember correctly 2 - 4 hours)
>> each to produce.
>>
>> Going back to the NLA automatic system, producing publications
>> properly structured with sections is more complex; for a start not
>> all publications specify the section information in a uniform way
>> (some don't) so a lot more effort is required to develop and maintain
>> such a system. Like many people on this list I agree that this is
>> essential.
>>
>> Regards
>> Isaac
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 15/05/2014 17:53, Derek Hornby wrote:
>>> The strange thing is though, whether there a just few
>>> Subscribers to a publication, or few hundred, the costs are same!
>>> So this brings us to an interesting point.
>>>
>>> We pay £39 a year, and can have as many publication as we want.
>>> Should we pay according to how many publications we subscribe to?
>>>
>>> If we are to be equal to sighted world, should we not pay
>>> Same cover price as the sighted!
>>>
>>> Regards, Derek
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: ntnm-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ntnm-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
>>> On Behalf
>>> Of Mark Kirkham
>>> Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2014 5:31 PM
>>> To: ntnm@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Subject: [ntnm] Re: comment on news papers and magazine"improvements"
>>>
>>> And hardly the greatest surprise is that we have already seen the
>>> RNIB about
>>> to discontinue some minority titles. I've just had an email
>>> informing me
>>> that the Wisden Cricketer is to go due to lack of subscribers. And
>>> don't you
>>> just love that email address they use to send emails: Mailbox, RNIB
>>> solutions - oh how amusing!
>>> Mark
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
Other related posts:
