The problem for me is that librarians and other people who are genuinely interested in Wikisource and IA don't understand why * they upload a good scan on IA * see a good book on IA, via the viewer * get an horrible djvu on Wikisource.
This is the issue we should try to solve, otherwise we will lose a potential important ally, content and new userbase. Aubrey On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 11:26 AM, Alex Brollo <[email protected]> wrote: > By now IA pdf too are very compressed, sometimes too much - the result > being impredictable; the problem is, that viewer doesn't uses djvu nor pdf > IMHO, so the quality of pdf (and of resulting djvu by pdf2djvu) doesn't > mirror at all the quality of viewer images. > > The IA pdf needs a good review before upload it into Commons. > > There are subltle advantages using djvu instead of pdf, i.e. fixing errors > into source file (adding/deleting/moving pages, manipulating text layer); > djvu is a great "wiki" format since it is *open*. > > Alex > > > > 2017-01-25 11:35 GMT+01:00 Yann Forget <[email protected]>: > >> >> >> 2017-01-25 8:40 GMT+01:00 Sam Wilson <[email protected]>: >> >>> >>> On Wed, 25 Jan 2017, at 03:27 PM, Andrea Zanni wrote: >>> >>> On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 1:45 AM, Sam Wilson <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> >>> Yann, do you mean you're getting good quality DjVu generated from the >>> PDF? Or from the original scan Jpegs? >>> >>> AFAIU, Yann is using ABBYY finereader to generate a djvu and then >>> uploads it directly to Commons. So outside of our ia-upload tool. >>> >>> Ah, okay. So if it could be done in the tool, that'd be nicer. >>> >>> Yes, it is a question of settings. >> >>> Aubrey: when you say directly use the PDF, you mean for the tool to copy >>> that across to Commons and not create a DjVu? >>> >>> >>> Yes. >>> If the Djvu quality is much lower than the PDF there's no reason to use >>> the djvu over the pdf :-( >>> >>> DjVu has to advantages over PDF: better compression, so small files for >> the same content, and better management of the text layer. >> Over if the compression is too high, the quality is not good. It is a >> question of a compromise between quality and size. >> >> Yann >> >> >>> Are we saying that we *never* want to use the IA PDF? That if there's a >>> DjVu we use it, and if there isn't we generate our own DjVu from the JP2 >>> and djvu.xml files? Or should the tool user make this call and we give them >>> a drop-down list of "PDF only", "Generate DjVu from PDF", and "Generate >>> DjVu from original scans" with a note about the last of these being higher >>> quality but slower? >>> >>> I think I'm in favour of just generating a high-quality DjVu and making >>> it simpler for the end user. But we want to be flexible too. jayantanth >>> mentioned <https://github.com/Tpt/ia-upload/issues/15> that he'd like >>> to be able to just upload the PDF for example. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> I can have a look at adding that feature perhaps? (Anyone else working >>> on this?) >>> >>> >>> Please ;-) >>> >>> >>> I can try! :-) >>> >>> Aubrey >>> *_______________________________________________* >>> Wikisource-l mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Wikisource-l mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Wikisource-l mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Wikisource-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l > >
_______________________________________________ Wikisource-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l
