Wikisource-l

wikisource-l@lists.wikimedia.org

4 participants
1318 discussions

Re: [Wikisource-l] [ol-discuss] Open Library, Wikisource, and cleaning and translating OCR of Classics
by Samuel Klein 12 Aug '09

12 Aug '09

Onion sourcing. That would be a nice improvement on simple cite styles. On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 12:10 PM, Gregory Crane<gregory.crane(a)tufts.edu> wrote: > There are various layers to this onion. The key element is that books and > pages are artifacts in many cases. What we really want are the logical > structures that splatter across pages. And across and around works... > First, we have added a bunch of content -- esp. editions of Greek and Latin > sources -- to the Internet Archive holdings and we are cataloguing editions > that are the overall collection, regardless of who put them there. This goes > well beyond the standard book catalogue records -- we are interested in the > content not in books per se. Thus, we may add hundreds of records for a Is there a way to deep link to a specific page-image from one of these works without removing it from the Internet Archive? > We would like to have useable etexts from all of these editions -- many of > which are not yet in our collections. Many of these are in Greek and need a > lot of work because the OCR is not very good. So bad OCR for them exists, but no usable etexts? > To use canonical texts, you need book/chapter/verse markup and you need > FRBR-like citations ... deep annotations... syntactic analyses, word sense, > co-reference... These are nice features, but perhaps you can develop a clean etext first, and overlay this metadata in parallel or later on. > My question is what environments can support contributions at various > levels. Clearly, proofreading OCR output is standard enough. > > If you want to get a sense of what operations need ultimately to be > supported, you could skim > http://digitalhumanities.org/dhq/vol/3/1/000035.html. That's a good question. What environments currently support OCR proofreading and translation, and direct links to page-images of the original source? This is doable, with no special software or tools, via wikisource (in multiple languages, with interlanguage links and crude paragraph alignment) and commons (for page images). The pages could also be stored in other repositories such as the Archive, as long as there is an easy way to link out to them or transclude thumbnails. [maybe an InstaCommons plugin for the Internet Archive?] That's quite an interesting monograph you link to. I see six main sets of features/operations described there. Each of them deserves a mention in Wikimedia's strategic planning. Aside from language analysis, each has significant value for all of the Projects, not just wikisource. OCR tools * OCR optimization: statistical data, page layout hints * Capturing page layout logical structures CROSS REFERENCING * Quote, source, plagiarism idenfication. * Named entity identification (automatic for some entities? hints) * Automatic linking (of urls, abbrv. citations, &c), markup projection TEXT ALIGNMENT * Canonical text services (chapter/verse equivalents) * Version Analysis b/t versions. * Translation alignment TRANSLATION SUPPORT * Automated translation (seed translations, hints for humans) * Translation dictionaries (on mouseover?) CROSS-LANGUAGE SEARCHING * Cross-referencing across translations * Quote identification across translations LANGUAGE ANALYSIS * Word analysis: word sense discovery, morphology. * Sentence analysis: syntactic, metrical (poetry) > Greg > > John Vandenberg wrote: >> >> On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 3:00 PM, Samuel Klein<meta.sj(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> >>> ... >>> Let's take a practical example. A classics professor I know (Greg >>> Crane, copied here) has scans of primary source materials, some with >>> approximate or hand-polished OCR, waiting to be uploaded and converted >>> into a useful online resource for editors, translators, and >>> classicists around the world. >>> >>> Where should he and his students post that material? >>> >> >> I am a bit confused. Are these texts currently hosted at the Perseus >> Digital Library? >> >> If so, they are already a useful online resource. ;-) >> >> If they would like to see these primary sources pushed into the >> Wikimedia community, they would need to upload the images (or DjVu) >> onto Commons, and the text onto Wikisource where the distributed >> proofreading software resides. >> >> We can work with them to import a few texts in order to demonstrate >> our technology and preferred methods, and then they can decide whether >> they are happy with this technology, the community, and the potential >> for translations and commentary. >> >> I made a start on creating a Perseus-to-Wikisource importer about a year >> ago...! >> >> Or they can upload the djvu to Internet Archive.. or a similar >> depositories... and see where it goes from there. >> >> >>> >>> Wherever they end up, the primary article about each article would >>> surely link out to the OL and WS pages for each work (where one >>> exists). >>> >> >> Wikisource has been adding OCLC numbers to pages, and adding links to >> archive.org when the djvu files came from there (these links contain >> an archive.org identifier). There are also links to LibraryThing and >> Open Library; we have very few rules ;-) >> >> -- >> John Vandenberg >> > >

1 0

Extension Collection
by Marc Galli 24 Jul '09

24 Jul '09

I do not agree, because you have forgotten a important point : a database, even composed by texts in domain public, is not in the domain public : the work that provide contributors is under GFDL, therefore Wikisource, as a database, is under GFDL. When one give the whole access to this database without the consent of the contributors (as the foundation did), it is a massive violation of the contributors right. And the worst is of course this deny of credit : everybody is free to "give" his work to an assocation that sells it without his consent, but don't count on me. « I am not saying that it is acceptable to give incorrect credit; I am saying that the credit is *not* incorrect except for translators. There is no authorship credit given for non-authors; this has nothing to do with Wikisource or the extension issue. Authorship is only noted for certain types of contributions based on creativity. Not time spent making the duplication between mediums more exact. Wikisource proofreaders have no more credit due to them for "A Christmas Carol" than the Mediawiki developers. Charles Dickens gets the credit for "A Christmas Carol". And this has nothing to do with the fact that "A Christmas Carol" is public domain. No one ever gets named an author for proofreading and other non-creative tasks. This is why it is not a copyright violation. Wasn't that what concerned you? The massive copyright violation you thought was going on? If your real concern is that the law and free content licenses do not grant IP rights for non-creative efforts, then I cannot help you. Wikisource happens to record all contributions in the history. But re-users should only need to recognize those who have a right to be named by law and custom. That includes those re-users who are simply printing a page from Wikisource. Birgitte SB »

3 2

Extension Collection
by Marc Galli 21 Jul '09

21 Jul '09

So, on Wikisource, it is autorized to deny or to attribued incorrectly credit to contributors for their work, because texts are in domain public. That's a very great consideration for hours and days that contributors could have spend on Wikisource to edit those textes. The respect we gain in the process is conform to the spirit of the Foundation. « This would only cause a copyvio problem in translations. Right now there are few enough of those that we should be able to make notations by hand. J'accuse is the only translation I know that use Page: Can someone see what can be done to give the proper credit? I am barely online this week. Birgitte SB »

2 1

Wikisource statistics updated
by John Vandenberg 20 Jul '09

20 Jul '09

http://stats.wikimedia.org/wikisource/EN/Sitemap.htm -- John Vandenberg ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Piotr Konieczny <piokon(a)post.pl> Date: Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 2:19 AM Subject: [Wiki-research-l] Wikipedia statistics updated To: wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org This should be a cause of much rejoicing :D http://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/TablesWikipediaEN.htm http://infodisiac.com/blog/2009/07/new-statistics-for-the-english-wikipedia/ http://infodisiac.com/blog/2009/07/new-statistics-for-the-english-wikipedia… -- Piotr Konieczny "The problem about Wikipedia is, that it just works in reality, not in theory." _______________________________________________ Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l

3 2

extension collection
by Marc Galli 20 Jul '09

20 Jul '09

Hi, I have already pointed some problems with the collection extension (see mediawiki.org), but now I see a new one that is less acceptable than the others : when I ask for a pdf file on a page composed with some others pages, the list of contributors in the end of the file could be false, because the extension creates this list from the history of the main page... So, if you have only made edits on the namespace "page", this extension will deny you all credits for your work. I think that this massive copyright violation is a good reason for asking to suppress this extension from Wikisource. Thanks. Marc

3 3

Fw: [Wikitech-l] MediaWiki and WebStore extension
by Alex Bernier 13 Jul '09

13 Jul '09

Hello, I forward on this list a mail posted on wikitech-l. I still have the same problem : with MediaWiki, ProofreadPage and WebStore installed on my server, the first time I try to get an automaticcaly generated image, I first get the 404 error status code and next I get the image file. So, some browsers doesn't display the image. When I next try to get the image the stuas code 404 is not in the HTTP response (it's OK, the file is on the server, it should not be genretaed), and the image is displayed. On the Wikimedia server, it seems that there is not the problem... Someone could tell me what is the configuration of WebStore (or Apache?) to avoid the problem ? Regards, Alex

1 0

Proofread_Page_on_oldwikisource
by Aleator Wiki 06 Jul '09

06 Jul '09

Hello all. I've finally asked for a Bugzilla for enabling ProofreadPage on oldwikisource. More info at http://wikisource.org/wiki/Wikisource:Scriptorium#Proofread_Page_on_oldwiki… and https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=19534 I hope everything is ok and don't have missed any discussion at which it was already decided if enabling it or not. Best regards. Aleator

1 0

Info/Law blog: Using Wikisource as an Alternative Open Access Repository for Legal Scholarship
by Yann Forget 21 Jun '09

21 Jun '09

Hello, This concerns Wikisource. Regards, Yann -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [Foundation-l] Info/Law blog: Using Wikisource as an Alternative Open Access Repository for Legal Scholarship Date: Sat, 20 Jun 2009 16:41:45 +0100 From: David Gerard http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/infolaw/2009/06/19/using-wikisource-as-an-alte… Interesting. How well does this fit with what Wikisource does? - d. -- http://www.non-violence.org/ | Site collaboratif sur la non-violence http://www.forget-me.net/ | Alternatives sur le Net http://fr.wikisource.org/ | Bibliothèque libre http://wikilivres.info | Documents libres

3 2

Proofreadpage, new version
by ThomasV 18 Jun '09

18 Jun '09

MediaWiki was updated by Tim on 15/06/2009, to version 1.16alpha. After a few post-update fixes, the code was resynchronized yesterday and today. Here is the summary of changes concerning the ProofreadPage extension The following new features are active : *Text layer extraction from djvu file *New page status for pages where that do not require double proofreading. *The old zoom was restored for view mode *A new zoom for the edit window : use mouse wheel to zoom, and mouse drag to move the image. *Configurable Headers and Footers *The "pagelist" command now accepts "from ... to" parameters. *A new "pages" command for easy transclusion of pages *Edit options can be set by the user using gadgets Detailed information is at : http://wikisource.org/wiki/Wikisource:ProofreadPage In Firefox, type Ctrl-Shift-R to update your browser. Thomas

2 1

Wikisource features New Holland flora
by John Vandenberg 15 Jun '09

15 Jun '09

A few days ago, the first Australian content was promoted to the front page of Wikisource, where it will stay for a month. http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Main_Page The project was started two years ago by Hesperian, who has done the majority of the work, with Moondyne validating the transcription, and Cygnis insignis has done some as well. http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/A_specimen_of_the_botany_of_New_Holland It is available as a PDF using the new Book tool: http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Wikisource:Books/A_specimen_of_the_botany_of_… Also worth a browse is the species index pages that this team have been creating as a bibliography of works related to the flora of Australia. http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Category:Wikisource_species_index_pages The page scans for this work came from the National Library of France ([[w:Gallica]]). http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Index:A_Specimen_of_the_Botany_of_New_Holland… A list of all featured texts can be seen here: http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Wikisource:Featured_texts -- John Vandenberg

2 1

Jump to page:

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

Wikisource-l