I frequently work offline on he.wikisource. I download the entire pdf file from commons to my hard drive, and OCR the page I need myself. One can use the OCR of wikisource and download the text too, I guess, page by page. Then I proof the text in a Word document, open to the lower half of my screen, with the pdf open on the upper half of the screen, where I go to the page I need with acrobat reader, and scroll both windows down or up as needed.
On Mon, Mar 26, 2018 at 11:21 AM, mathieu stumpf guntz < psychosl...@culture-libre.org> wrote: > Le 24/03/2018 à 16:22, billinghurst a écrit : > > Though that would defeat the purpose of online proofreading with account > verification. Some of the true value of our online process is that > contribution builds a level of trust and knowledge and that is reflected in > both our patrolling and the allocation of autopatrolled status. > > How providing tools to make batch work offline would interfere in anyway > with that? Once the work is done, it can be uploaded to Wikisource with > whichever account the user want. > > Actually, to my mind, the main benefit of the online aspect is the peer to > peer production model. Also there is no need of a central node carrying > accounts to take into account the trust given to a particular contributor. > There is digital signature technologies such as gpg for example. Having a > central node with a web interface just makes things easier for most users, > it doesn't improve the trustability of the environment. On the contrary, > with a single point of failure, we actually rely on a weaker solution on > this regard. > > Also how would you have access to templates, and components like that > from off-line? > > Well, that just show how innefecient are this tools to continue to > contribute while being offline. It's allways possible to install Mediawiki > and download required templates, but currently this process seems way to > complicated, doesn't it. > > > Also we generally cannot download the images separately as that is usually > part of the later clean-up where people have the technical skills. > > I'm afraid the term "image" misguided your answer. It's seems you > interpreted that as picture elements from files, while I was talking about > this files themselves. > > So yes, there is the capacity to have the text and proofread the text, > that actual checking the text against the image is not the sole component > of proofreading, and further it would not be at all helpful for validation. > > There is nothing magic about working directly in a browser. People do > download and upload all the required material anyway, but on a page per > page base. The result is just as valid as it is done when transactions are > operated on a file repository level. > > Cheers > > _______________________________________________ > Wikisource-l mailing list > Wikisource-l@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l > >
_______________________________________________ Wikisource-l mailing list Wikisource-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l
