[bksvol-discuss] Re: bottlenecks in submitting and validating

  • From: "Paula and James Muysenberg" <outofsightlife@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2005 11:56:35 -0500

    I agree with all your points. Another wish I have is that if we release
a book, we could upload the copy we have worked on. That way, if a validater
gets sick, or can't continue working on a book, the work already done would
not be lost.

Paula

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "E." <thoth93@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, September 01, 2005 8:38 AM
Subject: [bksvol-discuss] bottlenecks in submitting and validating


> we need smoother communication between submitters, validators and paid
staff.
> We have several bottlenecks in this process.
>
> It is possible that these might be remedied by changes to either the
> bookshare site or
> the site which includes "no book left behind".
>
> Bottleneck 1.  the endless renewal of a book for validating by the same
> individual.  I do not know what is going on here exactly.  Either you are
> working on a book or you are not.  I can understand some books taking a
> very long time, sometimes a month or two.  I have had this
> example.  Shurely a 90 day limit on a renewal by the same individual would
> work.  It could be waived by administrative approval.
>
> I realize that I am actually making for for an administrator here but the
> point is these are rare situations.  You would release the book after your
> 90 days no matter what.  You would have to apply to get it back.  This is
> deliberately harsh to stop abuse of th renewal process. Whatever is going
> on, I doubt it is contributing to ultimately getting the book into the
main
> collection.
>
> bottleneck 2. loss of knowledge of a book and its needs during the
> validation process.  I take a copy of a book to validate.  I learn its
> quirks.  For one reason or another I release it.  My knowledge is lost to
> the next validator.  There could be a comments field which I could fill
out
> (optionally) when I release a book.  The knowledge would possibly be
useful
> to future validators. If bookshare itself is not interested in doing this
> (or cannot do so financially), perhaps it could be part of the "no book
> left behind" program.  I am going for increased efficiency of the
> validation process here not who puts it on whose site.  The point is to
> have a running commentary about a specific book available for a validator.
> Perhaps bookshare could put a link to the alternate web site on the
release
> page where you could check and be sent to that site after releasing the
> book.  They the releaser could make a comment on the "no book left behind"
> site.
>
> bottleneck 3. quality of input.  The better the original scan the faster
> the validation work.
>
> If you have an older version of k1000, the upgrade to version 10 will cost
> you around a hundred dollars.  The tools you will get increase your power
> as a submitter or validator by creating a better product.
>
>
>



Other related posts: