have any of you heard of Michelangelo 2.0?

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by lanekko

Sick and tired of this.... logging off forever after this post, won't waste my time any longer, gotta lot to read I've already found the solution, don't need you guys anymore, nor to convince you about it ... have happy lives read a lot and enjoy your readers. I don't care if you like it, you don't, you buy it, you don't... this is my last post.

I didn't fake anything, the results are consistent all the way to the end : page 698, the one before the last one (pre test file)




And page 821 of the test file-the page before the last one in test file, it contains the same text, the breaks were removed:




Signing off....

See where the text reads Section 5?

That should be the start of a new paragraph. I am not sure, but it may or may not even be all on a line by it's own. But even if not, your example shows that the program got it WRONG!

[JohnP]

Yeah, JSWolf has it spot on. There is really NO WAY to automate broken sentences. Even by hand, I have a hard time deciding if there really is a paragraph there! Then there are broken sentences inside quoted material. Boy, try to figure THAT out. The best is when there are empty lines between the paragraphs which gives the computer a fighting chance.
The other thing going on here is that some people do not mind figuring out the meaning of badly formatted text when they are reading while others get extremely annoyed by sloppy work. Is it still readable? Yes. Is it enjoyable? Depends.
I am firmly on JS's side. If you are going to do it, do it right.
Now here is a really TRUE test. Get the e-book you are working on as a REAL book out of the library. Check to see how your program or handcrafted conversion compares to the carefully crafted and formatted paper book. You'd be surprised! I certainly was!
As for Lameco's posts, definitely a company propoganda machine. Take out all of his posts and read the resulting messages. No one else has had sucess with the program doing what it claims it will do! The converted copy may be better than the original but it will never be very good and will still need to be proofed line by line. That is a given with ANY program dealing with a badly formatted text file.
Lameco just has a lot lower standards then JSWolf and me on how a e-book should look.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by JohnP

Now here is a really TRUE test. Get the e-book you are working on as a REAL book out of the library. Check to see how your program or handcrafted conversion compares to the carefully crafted and formatted paper book. You'd be surprised! I certainly was!

That's precisely the reason why, for the books that "matter" to me (such as the Charles Dickens eBooks I've created), I do exactly that - compare against a paper book and fix up all the paragraph ends, etc. Takes a few days, sure, but I figure that if it gets me an eBook that I'll be able to read and re-read for the next 30 years, it's worthwhile.

BD, which I use to create my books, makes a real mess of paragraphs on occasions, especially in passages of dialogue.

[JohnP]

Harry, This is truly a noble use of you time. Now if did not have to decide on a particular proprietary FORMAT, your work could be for the ages. Now there is Kindle which has its OWN proprietary format. So what that make now? 8?

[HarryT]

My MobiPocket format books can trivially be converted back to HTML, so that makes them pretty portable. The Kindle uses MobiPocket format.

[Madam Broshkina]

Now here is a really TRUE test. Get the e-book you are working on as a REAL book out of the library. Check to see how your program or handcrafted conversion compares to the carefully crafted and formatted paper book. You'd be surprised! I certainly was!

Another option is to go to the Internet Archive (http://www.archive.org/index.php) search for the book you are working on and select Flip Book to view it. Note if the source is listed as a Book from Project Gutenberg you will not get this option. But there are usually more than one listing for a book.