[bksvol-discuss] Re: Where are those contrarians?
- From: "Kaitlyn Hill" <Kaitlyn@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 23 Jul 2005 10:24:21 -0700
Hi all:)
The fact that the heads are a part of the book would mean legally we are
changing the book before making it available. Isn't part of what we are
doing as a validators is to make sure the book is complete?
I know for my personal books that I have scanned I want the chapters because
I create book marks for them.
I'll say it again, Maybe they don't really know how to adjust the stripper.
Kaitlyn
Level III Practitioner
Reconnective healing and the Reconnection
Level 1 Reiki healing
Kaitlyn@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Find your vessel and fill it wih the light and with the light behind the
light,Then let the light shine for the world so others may know the truth
-----Original Message-----
From: bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Rui
Sent: Friday, July 22, 2005 9:49 PM
To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: Where are those contrarians?
Hi Scott:
As I stated before:
"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."
If I don't want to read the headers, I can strip them out myself or use an
automated tool (k1000) to do so."
Scott and Jim, nothing prevents you from stripping those headers out
yourself before you begin reading.
It would then leave the material in the master copy for those of us who want
it.
In fact, I would do more touch-up work on things like headers but I don't
because the first couple of lines of each page seem to be the strippers
domain and therefore my efforts would be futile.
The ironic thing is that we spend time on this list devising and testing
various stripper countermeasures and bookshare is aware of this and does not
discourage it.
Keri Carmos saw that full well with hp6.
(It's like rolling a boulder up hill)
Jim:
You make some interesting points.
As someone has previously mentioned, if the headers are too mangled, not
even the stripper will strip them.
The stripper is just plain erratic. It does different things to the same
header within the same book.
This is clearly a case where the benefit is not worth the cost. not with all
this collateral damage being done.
I urge you all to continue doing what your doing. (if anything try to
validate a little more so we can cut down the step 1 page)
I will drop this issue for now, but i am not forgetting about it and I trust
after these last couple days, Bookshare won't forget either.
-- Rui
a 2004 Volunteer of the year
and a 2005 pain in the rear. (smile)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Scott Blanks" <scottsjb@xxxxxxxxx>
To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, July 22, 2005 6:58 PM
Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: Where are those contrarians?
> Let me speak first as a reader of Bookshare books. I mostly read fiction,
> with the occasional pop culture book thrown in for variety. I read almost
> all these books in Braille. I don't want to see repeated text such as page
> numbers, author/title info, etc. If people want to be able to see that
> info, there should be an option to include or exclude this from your book.
> Chapters and other major headings should be included of course, and I
> believe that problem will be addressed.
>
> As a validator, I can't think of a good enough reason at this point to
> stop submitting books and validating them. That includes the stripper
> issue. If we stop submitting or validating works, we're hurting a much
> larger group of people than ourselves. The ultimate purpose of Bookshare
> is to give access to books. There are still many books rated fair on the
> website, and in the past I'm sure there were a much higher percentage of
> "fair" books submitted to the site, but we wouldn't have wanted those
> books held back from being available just because they were poorly
> scanned. I don't want people deprived of books just because of a missing
> chapter heading, or because there aren't page numbers included.
>
> Let's take things slow and easy folks.
>
> Scott
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Rui" <goldWave@xxxxxxx>
> To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Friday, July 22, 2005 6:28 PM
> 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
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
Other related posts:
