[bksvol-discuss] Re: stripper and colatteral damage
- From: "Charlene" <caota@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2005 06:56:22 -1000
I know I've taken great pains to keep headers and footers in books
because sometimes they can be useful and you definitely want to keep the
page numbers. I haven't checked the books that I've scanned after they
have been put up on bookshare but I suppose the headers along with page
numbers are gone then. Last night someone was talking about how
difficult it is to find their place using print page numbers in the brf
files and I'd think if headers were kept, this might be made easier.
Often, the page number is in that header along with a chapter title
which would give the person something more to use to find their place.
Charlene
-----Original Message-----
From: bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Rui
Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 6:17 AM
To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
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.
>
>
>
>
Other related posts:
