Popular public OPDS catalogs

[kguil]

Yes, the DB API only allows a maximum of 1,000 results back. There is a workaround but it would involve traversing all the DB folders making it painfully slow to get the file list.

If your book is not in Marvin's DB list, 1.1.5 has a feature to launch the native DB app if it is installed.

[kyteflyer]

Originally Posted by kguil

Yes, the DB API only allows a maximum of 1,000 results back. There is a workaround but it would involve traversing all the DB folders making it painfully slow to get the file list.

If your book is not in Marvin's DB list, 1.1.5 has a feature to launch the native DB app if it is installed.

Its fine, Kris. Seems to me there are now a bazillion ways to get at your books with a minimum of fuss. what you've done thus far is brilliant.

[kyteflyer]

Originally Posted by Faterson

I think Kris mentioned in the Marvin thread it was a Dropbox limit.

As to space issues, when it comes to old books, I prefer reading them in photographed PDF editions, and those can be extremely hungry in terms of megabytes. I'd prefer to read all books in EPUB in Marvin only, but I hate modernized editions, and modern EPUB editions of old classics tend to be sloppy. My no. 1 favourite writer is probably Leo Tolstoy, and his literary output was prodigious (dozens of volumes), so the Count on his own can devour a couple of PDF gigabytes of your quota. But, nothing beats reading Anna Karenina (or should I say Анна Каренина) exactly in the same 19th century original Russian edition as it appeared to a reader who purchased it during Tolstoy's lifetime. I wish there was reliable OCR software that could convert old editions into high-quality EPUBs without too much hassle, but even the best current OCR software, which I think is FineReader, is struggling with this.

Given how hungry pdfs are for space, I am simply not up there with you, Faterson. If I wanted to read an original or old book in its close-to-native state, I'd get the actual book. Could certainly not be fussed doing as you do, and I detest pdf, and only read in that format if forced to do so... Now I see why Dropbox isn't enough space for you. You must need terabytes!!

[Faterson]

Originally Posted by kyteflyer

If I wanted to read an original or old book in its close-to-native state, I'd get the actual book.

That is impossible in 99 out of 100 cases, of course. Such old editions typically are not lent out to library patrons any longer, either. Also, do you have an idea how dirty and smelly such old books typically are? And you can't make notes and highlights inside them. Nope, I always prefer an electronic version over a paper version of a book.

Originally Posted by kyteflyer

I detest pdf, and only read in that format if forced to do so...

I detest PDFs just as you do, and avoid them whenever I can. It's just that as a literary scholar, you have no choice. No matter how detestable and unwieldy a PDF file is, it's still a better option than reading some randomly modernized, typos-infested EPUB edition of the same work.

[kyteflyer]

Originally Posted by Faterson

I detest PDFs just as you do, and avoid them whenever I can. It's just that as a literary scholar, you have no choice. No matter how detestable and unwieldy a PDF file is, it's still a better option than reading some randomly modernized, typos-infested EPUB edition of the same work.

True, and as my scholarly days are LONG gone... well... I wish you well. Glad its not me

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Faterson

I detest PDFs just as you do, and avoid them whenever I can. It's just that as a literary scholar, you have no choice. No matter how detestable and unwieldy a PDF file is, it's still a better option than reading some randomly modernized, typos-infested EPUB edition of the same work.

That's why there are some of us who create properly proof-read and nicely formatted editions of the classics. Take a look at my uploads in the MR library.

[kguil]

Can anyone confirm that the OPDS catalog at the Internet Archive (http://bookserver.archive.org/catalog/) is down?

[Philantrop]

It's working here, Kris.

[Faterson]

Originally Posted by HarryT

That's why there are some of us who create properly proof-read and nicely formatted editions of the classics. Take a look at my uploads in the MR library.

We're off-topic here, so I'll keep this reply as brief as possible. Can you point me to a specific upload or two of yours that you're particularly proud of? I tried to find some of your uploads but failed, there are just too many. I don't deny there are some properly done EPUB editions of classics, but they are more exceptions than the rule. Let me stress the problem is two-fold:

1. typos and/or formatting
2. bad source

It's often item no. 2 that causes modern EPUB editions to be not usable for serious literary scholars. The volunteer digitizers are admirable people, but they just frequently take whatever modern paper edition is most accessible to them, and digitize that one. Unfortunately, it's rare that a truly original edition is available to a volunteer digitizer (for reasons mentioned earlier). What typically happens, is that a modernized edition of a classic gets digitized, making it not usable for literary scholarship. My pet peeve is "modernized" (I prefer to call it bastardized) punctuation, with commas (and others) willfully removed from the original text or inserted into it, just to conform to some imaginary "modern standard" and its expectations.

I admit the crushing majority of e-book readers aren't literary scholars, and for them, meeting the criterion no. 1 above (no typos, nice formatting) is enough. Literary scholars, however (it's almost an affliction), need to see both criterion no. 1 and no. 2 fulfilled. Bad original source edition makes the EPUB edition unusable, no matter how pretty it looks. Which is why scholars are frequently only left with the option to read those unwieldy PDF files of photographed original editions.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Faterson

We're off-topic here, so I'll keep this reply as brief as possible. Can you point me to a specific upload or two of yours that you're particularly proud of? I tried to find some of your uploads but failed, there are just too many. I don't deny there are some properly done EPUB editions of classics, but they are more exceptions than the rule. Let me stress the problem is two-fold:

1. typos and/or formatting
2. bad source

It's often item no. 2 that causes modern EPUB editions to be not usable for serious literary scholars. The volunteer digitizers are admirable people, but they just frequently take whatever modern paper edition is most accessible to them, and digitize that one. Unfortunately, it's rare that a truly original edition is available to a volunteer digitizer (for reasons mentioned earlier). What typically happens, is that a modernized edition of a classic gets digitized, making it not usable for literary scholarship. My pet peeve is "modernized" (I prefer to call it bastardized) punctuation, with commas (and others) willfully removed from the original text or inserted into it, just to conform to some imaginary "modern standard" and its expectations.

Try my upload of "Sense and Sensibility". It's the 1st edition text, with original spelling and punctuation.

Mobi ePub

[Faterson]

Hats off to you, Harry! You must be that exception I was referring to. Original spelling and punctuation, that's exactly what's required for literary scholarship. I'm looking forward to (re)reading Jane Austen in your EPUB editions in Marvin, and I'll let you know if I find anything suspicious. Very few digitizers professionally go through all the trouble you did, to quote:

Originally Posted by HarryT

Thoroughly proofed the book against a printed text. Restored the first edition text, and the somewhat quirky and inconsistent spelling which Jane Austen used. Corrected many hundreds of errors. Renumbered the chapters to reflect the original publication in three volumes.

[HarryT]

The others haven't yet been properly proofed, so I should wait for those. Currently doing "Pride and Prejudice", as you can see from my sig. I have, though, done the complete works of Dickens, if that's of any interest, plus various other stuff.

We now return you to the topic of this thread .

[kguil]

@Philantrop, I can see the top level of the catalog but whenever I try to drill in, I'm getting a 404 on the sub feeds. I'm noticing this using third party feed readers and web browsers too. Odd.

@Harry, I'm sure you got this from many people but I would like to join them in thanking you for your phenomenal work. I've enjoyed many of your books.

[Philantrop]

Kris, you probably noticed but just to be on the safe side: The links from the top-level onwards are relative, e. g.

<link href="new" type="application/atom+xml"/>

You can verify that in your Chromium, uh, browser ;) of choice:

http://bookserver.archive.org/catalog/new

[kguil]

Duh. Missed that. Thanks Philantrop.