Quote:
Originally Posted by Ralph Sir Edward
Dennis, I agree about proofreading. Here are two answers. There may be others.
Answer #1 - Request the person scanning do the proofreading. After all, if <your> name is going to be associated with the e-book (scan and proof credit), you have a real incentive to do a good job. Who would want a credit line (scanned and proofed by X) and then another line (reproofed by Y)? Or even worse, somebody cursing your name for a lousy job done.
|
I would certainly do that. What I could
not assume was that it would be done
well. Do you suppose the folks who contributed older, error-filed etexts to PG before DP took over deliberately sent error-ridden copy? Most of them probably
thought they'd proofed it...
Once a volunteer had established a track record of submitting clean, error-free copy, I might modify my process for work from that volunteer, but they would have to establish that track record.
And in many cases, the original hard copy source has errors, which should really be corrected in the electronic edition, so simply insuring your electronic copy is a duplicate of the hard copy text isn't enough. Proofreading is a technical skill requiring a large vocabulary and knowledge of the grammar of the language which most folks lack. There are reasons why publishers pay professionals to do it. There will be things the most dedicated amateur proofreader won't catch because they won't
know it's an error when they see it.
Quote:
|
Answer #2 - Have the author (or heirs or assigns) proof the initial scan and proof. After all, they are the ones who will be making money off the e-book, so they have an economic interest in a good quality product. In addition, validating galley proofs (which is what these are, in essence) has traditionally been the task of the author for p-books anyways.
|
That happens as part of the process. The author gets galley proofs to examine and correct before the book goes to print.
The late John Brunner told an amusing story about that. He did an SF novel where he put in a number of deliberate usages that he
knew a proofreader would want to "correct". So when he submitted the manuscript, he carefully marked it up, circling all such usages, and putting "STET!" in the margin to indicate the usage
was deliberate. Sure enough, when he got the galleys, every instance had been "corrected". Apparently, the publisher had a proofreader who didn't know what STET! meant...
Quote:
|
I agree that Project Gutenberg has gotten better, but speaking as a scan contributor, it comes at a price. I have 3 books in process, and the oldest one has been in process for 11 months (to date) and it still hasn't made it out to the public. Frustrating.
|
What scans?
Part of the problem is the nature of the process. PG and DP are volunteer operations. The stuff that gets attention is the stuff the volunteers
want to work on. Contribute something obscure, and it may be a while before anyone with the enthusiasm for that topic comes along to work on it.
Quote:
|
Assuming the idea has merit, how would you get the ball rolling? I'm just a reader, and have no clue who to contact.
|
I don't either. It depends on what is out there that might merit this approach, and who might wish to return it to publication.
______
Dennis