[bksvol-discuss] Re: synopses, quality, etc.

  • From: "Jesse Fahnestock" <Jesse.F@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2004 08:07:32 -0700

In other news, I successfully posted without equal signs or code! Fingers 
crossed!

-----Original Message-----
From: bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
[mailto:bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Guido Corona
Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2004 4:43 PM
To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: synopses, quality, etc.



Thank you so much Jesse. 

On the subject of my draconian proposal to reject postings based on the 
artistry of synopsis,  that was a complete straw-man,  which I sometimes call 
an 'intellectual irritant'.  I was fully expecting the idea to be vehemently 
rejected by volunteers and staff alike, 
after some furious discussion on the subject.  I am happy to say I did succeed 
beyond belief! 

About quoting Amazon:  agreed,  we should not quote Amazon in synopsis,  but we 
can look at Amazon book summaries and extremely-loosely paraphrase them,  or 
draw inspiration from them,  without making the attribution obvious, or even 
guessable. 

A mechanism for volunteers to go and fix book records after books have been 
published, to update summaries,  correct authors, titles, ISBN and the like 
will be extremely welcome. 

In the meantime,  I invite volunteers who would like some help with the 
creation of synopsis to post their requests to the list,  with a subjectline 
somewhat like: 

Synopsis help wanted:  Satura by Aloysius WQ. Schmaltzenstein Gavronsky 

Some of the most tediously verbose volunteers like myself may often be 
delighted to assist. 

Guido 
  

Guido D. Corona
IBM Accessibility Center,  Austin Tx.
IBM Research,
Phone:  (512) 838-9735
Email: guidoc@xxxxxxxxxxx

Visit my weekly Accessibility WebLog at:
http://www-3.ibm.com/able/weblog/corona_weblog.html





"Jesse Fahnestock" <Jesse.F@xxxxxxxxxxxx> 
Sent by: bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 


04/29/2004 09:06 AM 


Please respond to
bksvol-discuss



To
<bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> 

cc

Subject
[bksvol-discuss] synopses, quality, etc.

        




Hey all -- sorry I've been offline for some lively conversation! I'll try to 
weigh in where necessary. As always, please feel free to email me offline about 
any of these issues.

1. Synopses: Just to be clear, while I understand the desire for synopses, 
books missing one or both forms of synopsis should not be rejected on that 
basis, by volunteer or administrator. I have no problem with the urging and 
cajoling of our fellow volunteers to include them, but making them mandatory 
would simply be prohibitive and discouraging for some of our submitters, 
especially those who submit in bulk. 

2. The synopsis bug: There are a few cases where the synopsis being entered 
will not stick: namely, books that have previously been submitted and approved, 
whether or not they have since been withdrawn. In those cases the original 
synopses will stick. Validators are able to change the synopses on brand new 
submissions, however, so please don't be discouraged! The vast majority of your 
synopses are sticking. We're working on fixing it for books that have already 
existed on Bookshare.org, but it's been a tricky one.

3. Synopses from other sources: please do not copy synopses from Amazon.com or 
any other source, unless it is the same copy found on the book jacket. That is 
copyrighted material, and while it is "quotable" in a news context (like 
Alison's newsletter) it should not be used as the synopsis in our collection.

4. Site improvements: the categories issue is a long-standing one, and one 
we've spent a lot of time trying to plan for. While we do acknowledge the need 
for better category management, making changes would require a large amount of 
database work (not to mention likely manual recategorization), and, if it were 
not a completely robust solution, might need to be done over and over again. 
The full-scale answer is to change our metadata source entirely to something 
like what the library of congress uses. This change is probably a ways out 
still, but given our limited resources, it probably makes more sense to make 
that change once rather than try to take half-steps.

The notification for users of rejection reasons is on the way, I'm told. Look 
for it in a rejection notice coming to you soon! (grin)

The short synopsis field is a textarea field, and that does not accept the 
maxlength attribute. As Sara (I think) noted, fixing the length would require 
javascript, which is problematic for many users. I will float the idea for a 
single synopsis -- keep in mind that this will be displayed on the search 
results page, however, so it would still need to be pretty limited. You 
couldn't have a 100-word synopsis there.

5. Regarding text quality: I love the fact that this group has high standards 
-- I'm consistently amazed at the effort being put into the scans of others by 
our volunteers. But I'd encourage us to try to avoid accusatory messages when 
it comes to text quality. There are many mitigating factors, some of which have 
already been pointed out here, and we would be wrong to discourage anyone from 
submitting the books they want to share. So let's focus on ensuring the 
readability and legibility of what has been submitted, and of course 
encouraging our fellow scanners with tips and techniques as many of us already 
do.


________________________

Jesse Fahnestock
Collection Development Coordinator, Bookshare.org
www.bookshare.org

A Project of The Benetech Initiative - Technology Serving Humanity
480 S. California Ave., Suite 201
Palo Alto, CA 94306-1609  USA
(650)475-5440 x133
(650) 475-1066 FAX
jesse@xxxxxxxxxxxx
www.benetech.org

Other related posts:

  1. Home
  2. bksvol-discuss
  3. Archive
  4. 04-2004