[bksvol-discuss] Re: validators and quality ratings

  • From: Jill O'Connell <jillocon@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 13:48:25 -0700

I think we are on the same track; what I was trying to say was why taking longer with a book is often necessary even though not required under Bookshare's validating requirements. I like you want to make the book excellent if I can and often deliberately choose a book marked "good" if it is something I want to read.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Cindy" <popularplace@xxxxxxxxx>
To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, July 22, 2005 10:53 AM
Subject: [bksvol-discuss] validators and quality ratings



Jill,

One of us must be misunderstanding. I thought that
validators are supposed to change the quality rating
if what they do to the books changes the quality, and
that's what I've been doing. If the validator takes
the time to improve the quality of the book rather
than just does the minimum checking for copyright and
complete pages, it makes sense to change the quality
of the book. If the validator doesn't do anything more
than the minimum, I suppose changing the quality isn't
necessasry. I generally take Fair books and make them
excellent.

Cindy


__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com



--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.338 / Virus Database: 267.9.2/55 - Release Date: 7/21/2005




Other related posts: