2017-01-02 16:49 GMT+01:00 Alex Brollo <alex.brollo(a)gmail.com>om>:
Please take a look to
djvu, this is precisely a djvu-only item that I uploaded some days ago. I
asked for permission to create "djvu-only items" into IA forum and I got
it; this is the fiirst item I created; as you see there's some "implicit
convention" too (the name of item is the original one + a _djvu suffix: it
has been derived from https://archive.org/details/spinoza_etica_paravia
and metadata are the same, but a standard warning "Derived from files
into L'Etica <https://archive.org/details/spinoza_etica_paravia>" into
the description field.
So far I did not do the last step, t.i. adding a "backlink" from original
item to the derived one.
internetarchive.py allows to automatize the whole work (to download
metadata of source item, to build the new item name and to add the warning
do description field and to upload the new item).
2017-01-02 14:37 GMT+01:00 Sam Wilson <sam(a)samwilson.id.au>au>:
On Mon, 2 Jan 2017, at 05:29 PM, Andrea Zanni wrote:
Ideally, we should talk to IA about this.
Adding a comment on the IA item is a very low-cost solution and I think
is important, adding the djvu would be much better. We should check if a
script can edit every kind of item and add files (I think not).
Yes, good idea about talking to them.
I wonder about the workflow too, because what about the situation of
someone uploading a new work with our tool: the script creates a new IA
item then (I assume as the 'wikisource-import-tool' or whatever user) and
then it will have full permissions over that item. So the update-DjVu
scenario will only apply for IA items that already exist but which don't
have DjVu files (i.e. only the last few months' worth). Which is good...
Wikisource-l mailing list