3.1242 scanning and e-texts (193)
Willard McCarty (MCCARTY@vm.epas.utoronto.ca)
Fri, 30 Mar 90 23:26:17 EST
Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 3, No. 1242. Friday, 30 Mar 1990.
(1) Date: Fri, 30 Mar 90 13:10:49 EST (61 lines)
From: "Michael S. Hart" <HART@UIUCVMD>
Subject: Re: 3.1235 scanning and e-texts, cont. (251)
(2) Date: Fri, 30 Mar 90 12:10:49 CST (61 lines)
From: "Michael S. Hart" <HART@UIUCVMD>
Subject: Re: 3.1235 scanning and e-texts, cont. (251)
(3) Date: Fri, 30 Mar 90 16:45 CST (53 lines)
From: Alvin Snider <ASNIDEPD@UIAMVS>
Subject: Alpha centauri
(1) --------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 30 Mar 90 13:10:49 EST
From: "Michael S. Hart" <HART@UIUCVMD>
Subject: Re: 3.1235 scanning and e-texts, cont. (251)
First an answer to the question of OEDs: Oxford, in their communications
with me, have referred to the new OED as the OED2, while some of you have
referred to it as the NOED. The Project Gutenberg edition is made from a
set of first editions of each volume, beginning with the 1888 A-B volume,
and including each additional volume as it enters the public domain. The
Oxford lawyers have been quite fuzzy about which volumes they consider to
be still under copyright protection. The OED project I mentioned was the
preparation of the CD-ROM and tape version of the first edition, which is
sold for around $1,000. I am not sure exactly when this project began or
finished, but the CDROM has been out for a few years and I heard it began
in the mid-70s. I suppose it was inevitable that someone would force the
use of the term OED1 for this edition, which Project Gutenberg intends to
sell for $249 or less (to include only the volumes which are currently in
the public domain). However, the most interested party in the developing
of this work seems to be Oxford itself, and their attitude is probably in
at least some manner self-evident to most of you. I have had no contacts
with the newer editions of the OED, partially in order to prove I haven't
used any of it in the preparation of our work, which began in 1971 before
any of these projects. However, unless some real interest is shown in it
the project will be abandoned, at least for the time being, while lawyers
have their field day. While I am extremely interested in the creation of
such works at extremely low prices for mass availability, it would appear
I am nearly alone in this, as support is minimal and hassles have greatly
outweighed the support. As in the past it might occur that thousands and
thousands of pages we have prepared will be unused in that world outside,
outside the walls of Project Gutenberg. We henceforth retreat to do work
on publicizing etexts in general and disproving the outlandish claims the
majority of the public seem to believe about the cost and utility of text
in electronic forms. As an initial step Project Gutenberg has just given
license for EVERY STUDENT AT THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS PRESENT & FUTURE,
to have electronic copies of 20 of Shakespeare's plays AT NO CHARGE. Any
student or member of a campus theatre group may download a copy on demand
at our Micro Resource Center in the Illini Union as soon as the paperwork
is completed. This will be followed by another set of etexts called "The
Greatest Literary Works* of All Time" (*plus a few other important ones.)
A 300M CDROM will be placed in the Micro Resource Center for use as well,
this time by faculty and staff, in addition to students, but not for copy
to their own media. These restrictions are not Project Gutenberg's but a
part of the licensing we have obtained. We regret to have to apologize -
but an earlier description of the license for Shakespeare on Disk, posted
on several listservers, might have stated that faculty and staff might be
included in the license. If this has inconvenienced anyone please accept
my heartfelt apologies.
As a portion of our effort to publicize etexts, Project Gutenberg is also
making available a copy of Alice in Wonderland, which is public domain, a
book old enough, we hope, to escape questions about copyright, as we have
derived our etext indirectly from the first edition. In response to many
requests that etexts be made available via anonymous FTP, we will also be
posting this at the Micro Resource Center on MRCNEXT, the NeXT server.
Once again I have reached the end of my 56 line I allow myself for server
oriented mail. Future messages should be shorter, as I intend to retire,
at least somewhat, from public discussions on these topics, rather to put
my energy into proving etexts are not only feasible, but inexpensive. We
manage to put our text on disk for only several dollars per page: anyone
saying it costs more must be doing it the hard way.
(2) --------------------------------------------------------------74----
Date: Fri, 30 Mar 90 12:10:49 CST
From: "Michael S. Hart" <HART@UIUCVMD>
Subject: Re: 3.1235 scanning and e-texts, cont. (251)
First an answer to the question of OEDs: Oxford, in their communications
with me, have referred to the new OED as the OED2, while some of you have
referred to it as the NOED. The Project Gutenberg edition is made from a
set of first editions of each volume, beginning with the 1888 A-B volume,
and including each additional volume as it enters the public domain. The
Oxford lawyers have been quite fuzzy about which volumes they consider to
be still under copyright protection. The OED project I mentioned was the
preparation of the CD-ROM and tape version of the first edition, which is
sold for around $1,000. I am not sure exactly when this project began or
finished, but the CDROM has been out for a few years and I heard it began
in the mid-70s. I suppose it was inevitable that someone would force the
use of the term OED1 for this edition, which Project Gutenberg intends to
sell for $249 or less (to include only the volumes which are currently in
the public domain). However, the most interested party in the developing
of this work seems to be Oxford itself, and their attitude is probably in
at least some manner self-evident to most of you. I have had no contacts
with the newer editions of the OED, partially in order to prove I haven't
used any of it in the preparation of our work, which began in 1971 before
any of these projects. However, unless some real interest is shown in it
the project will be abandoned, at least for the time being, while lawyers
have their field day. While I am extremely interested in the creation of
such works at extremely low prices for mass availability, it would appear
I am nearly alone in this, as support is minimal and hassles have greatly
outweighed the support. As in the past it might occur that thousands and
thousands of pages we have prepared will be unused in that world outside,
outside the walls of Project Gutenberg. We henceforth retreat to do work
on publicizing etexts in general and disproving the outlandish claims the
majority of the public seem to believe about the cost and utility of text
in electronic forms. As an initial step Project Gutenberg has just given
license for EVERY STUDENT AT THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS PRESENT & FUTURE,
to have electronic copies of 20 of Shakespeare's plays AT NO CHARGE. Any
student or member of a campus theatre group may download a copy on demand
at our Micro Resource Center in the Illini Union as soon as the paperwork
is completed. This will be followed by another set of etexts called "The
Greatest Literary Works* of All Time" (*plus a few other important ones.)
A 300M CDROM will be placed in the Micro Resource Center for use as well,
this time by faculty and staff, in addition to students, but not for copy
to their own media. These restrictions are not Project Gutenberg's but a
part of the licensing we have obtained. We regret to have to apologize -
but an earlier description of the license for Shakespeare on Disk, posted
on several listservers, might have stated that faculty and staff might be
included in the license. If this has inconvenienced anyone please accept
my heartfelt apologies.
As a portion of our effort to publicize etexts, Project Gutenberg is also
making available a copy of Alice in Wonderland, which is public domain, a
book old enough, we hope, to escape questions about copyright, as we have
derived our etext indirectly from the first edition. In response to many
requests that etexts be made available via anonymous FTP, we will also be
posting this at the Micro Resource Center on MRCNEXT, the NeXT server.
Once again I have reached the end of my 56 line I allow myself for server
oriented mail. Future messages should be shorter, as I intend to retire,
at least somewhat, from public discussions on these topics, rather to put
my energy into proving etexts are not only feasible, but inexpensive. We
manage to put our text on disk for only several dollars per page: anyone
saying it costs more must be doing it the hard way.
(3) --------------------------------------------------------------60----
Date: Fri, 30 Mar 90 16:45 CST
From: Alvin Snider <ASNIDEPD@UIAMVS>
Subject: Alpha centauri
Before undertaking massive programs for preservation and restrospective
book conversion, we should think very seriously about their cost,
feasibility, and ultimate value. Once such projects get funded and
institutionalized, they take on lives of their own. It's sort of like
cold fusion: we want cheap energy or universal instant access to the
entire LC collection so badly that we downplay the difficulties
involved in achieving them. And once you've committed real time
and real money, it's hard to say, "Sorry, we made a mistake."
Although I'm grateful for its existence, am I alone in thinking that
microfilm looks less and less like the ideal solution it once seemed?
To reach back further for an example, in the nineteenth century and
early decades of our own, libraries and collectors adopted the practice
of trimming and mounting (really cutting and pasting) hand-press books.
I've just finished examining one such vandalized volume, retrieved from
undergoing re-preservation. While most of the book, printed in 1688,
remains in pretty good shape, the new paper used for mounting has badly
deteriorated. Those who trashed this book in the name of "preservation"
would have served future readers better by tying it together with string
or leaving it to moulder in a box. Perhaps computing humanists, who
will shape the future of the book, should adopt some version of the
Hippocratic motto "To help or at least to do no harm."
As far as funding goes, the sums we've seen bandied about over the last
two weeks recall the old joke about government spending: A billion here
and a billion there and pretty soon you're talking real money. Why use
the B-1 bomber as your negative example? Given a choice between (say)
having on-line access to the entire corpus of Shakespeare criticism or
increased funding for AIDS research, I know which way I'd swing. Anyway,
there are plenty of people who make it a point of honor never to look at
critical books published before 1970.
Remember, too, that the film archives at LC, UCLA, and elsewhere haven't
had much success (as far as I know) finding corporate or government
sponsorship to underwrite the cost of preserving the millions of feet of
fast decomposing nitrate stock. This is an urgent situation involving
works that are both high art *and* a valuable commodity in which the Ted
Turners of the world have a tangible interest.
Cordially,
Alvin Snider
Iowa City