[Web4lib] Google Allows Downloads of out-of-copyright Books

[K.G. Schneider]

> I suspect that it's the correcting, rather than finding errors, that is
> onerous. I, too, was thinking of having somewhere that people could note
> which books have errors (I just downloaded one that I wanted and found
> pages missing -- very disappointing). Now I think we should have a place
> where people can report books that appear to be good scans so that other
> libraries can concentrate on the books that AREN'T on that list. In the
> end, though, it's really only economical to do QC as part of the
> scanning process, when you have the book and the scanning equipment and
> the operators right there. Like most other activities, clean up after
> the fact is the least desirable way to go about it.
> 
> kc
> 
> Patricia F Anderson wrote:
> > Perhaps take a folksonomy approach -- have a system by which patrons
> > can report or recommend correction of errors they discover. A
> > wikipedia model, perhaps. Just brainstorming, but it could take the
> > burden of correction off the local coders.

Actually both approaches are good... clean up as you go along, but enable
the ability to comment on sites (negative, positive, evaluative, etc.). The
latter is not only good 2.0-ish practice, but also could provide valuable
information on problems users find that are not necessarily evident to
providers (and also enables in the networked environment the well-respected
practice of conversing through marginalia... see the NYT this past weekend,
"John Adams Talks to His Books"). 

Karen G. Schneider
kgs at bluehighways.com