Your theoretical situation makes getting rid of the stripper even more
important because a person in your theoretical situation who might need
access to page numbers would probably not be able to find or use the ones
that exist in the DAISY book. Besides find and replace is an option in
absolutely any word processor. Now don't jjump on me and say you've found
something that didn't have find and replace, because something like notepad
doesn't necessarily have it, but then it isn't a Word processor, and I
don't know why a person who has a computer wouldn't have a word processor
of some kind. <smile>
I do think the submittors and validators should remove the headers, though.
There shouldn't be any reason why the reader should have to do it. Of
course, I also think anyone who uses a computer or notetaker should learn
something about how to use them, and I consider find and replace a beginner
technique not only something for advanced users. Advanced find and replace
is using commands to find formatting characters as well as text strings.
Most documents you obtain from someone and put on your note taker are a bit
of a mess and some repairs are necessary, so everyone who gets one should
be tought how to do a little editing. Remember that things are easier if
no one first scares you off by telling you the job will be very hard. :-)
Right now it seems like bookshare considers BRF a second rate format
because they retain nothing of the original books formatting information,
which doesn't have to be that way. Also, if you do a quick search it is
DAISY that the user is first presented with. I usually do use DAISY and
convert it myself if I wish to read it on my braille note, but I don't
think BRF should be considered less important than DAISY, because it seems
to be most peoples primary format. It also can be accessed on more
devices.
That reminds me that someone said DAISY was the format that Kurzweil
downloads from bookshare, but in actuality you get the choice of which
format you prefer.
It doesn't make sense to me that people must go through many tests and
learn how to operate just about all equipment that is not a computer, but
people are expected to just sit down and start using a computer without any
prior training, testing, or information. No wonder why people and
businesses have so many problems. Using adaptive technology is even more
complex, so users shouldn't have to fend for themselves unless they choose
to learn independently.
Sarah Van Oosterwijck Assistive Technology Trainer http://home.earthlink.net/~netentity
Rui,
I'm by no means an expert, but I want to throw a theoretical situation out there and see what you think. Anyone else is certainly welcome to answer as well.
Let's say I'm a Bookshare member, a reader, not a volunteer of any ilk. I have *some* adaptive technology, like a screen reader and a notetaker such as a Braillenote or Pac Mate with braille display. However, I don't have a scanning program such as OB or Kurzweil. Can I use another program to strip the header/footer info? I haven't looked into it, but does MS Word do it? Or maybe Duxbury? Not to say that the average Bookshare user would have Duxbury, it's not too likely in fact. Essentially, I'm asking if there is a feasible way to remove the info, *if* the person wants to do so and doesn't have the adaptive technology to address the need?
What do you all think? Scott
----- Original Message ----- From: "Rui" <goldWave@xxxxxxx>
To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, July 23, 2005 12:49 AM
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
>>
>>
>
-- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.338 / Virus Database: 267.9.4/57 - Release Date: 7/22/2005
