Sorry, just a one more question (shame mailing lists don't have edit buttons!).
Will you be avoiding inclusion of fair use images? I would highly
recommend this as it is quite hard to know where you are with fair
As Erik suggests, working within Wikipedia itself might be useful,
might I suggest that you operate transparently. What I mean by this is
that you tell us that you have had an order for a book and the client
has specified a particular list of articles. Knowing this we can help
you select the best versions of the article from the history, edit
these versions for spelling and grammar, help you remove fallacious
statements within these versions and help select which images to
include. If you agree with this it would be a good idea to set up a
Wiki so that this kind of editing can easily be done.
On 12/07/06, Erik Moeller <eloquence(a)gmail.com> wrote:
this is very powerful stuff, and it's great that you're doing it. A
couple of technical questions:
1) Are you using the highest quality images available for the PDF
generation? Is the quality setting deliberately low?
Comparing, for instance,
with the image used in the PDF under "Wigner quasi-probability
distribution", the PDF image seems to have much more pronounced
2) What mechanism do you use to generate the PDF files? Is there any
chance that part of the software might become open source, if it isn't
already? I know many people who would be interested in this
functionality outside the context of Wikipedia.
If this service works well, from my perspective (I don't have any
Foundation authority) it would be great if this could be developed
into a larger partnership, with the project being featured prominently
on our side (perhaps in return for a larger percentage of the
foundation-l mailing list
Oldak Quill (oldakquill(a)gmail.com)