Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

I may be seeing this thorough a “sensitive” lens, but the language on the website feels like it’s bashing Project Gutenberg in order to show SE’s strengths.

> Ebook projects like Project Gutenberg transcribe ebooks and make them available for the widest number of reading devices. Standard Ebooks takes ebooks from sources like Project Gutenberg, formats and typesets them using a carefully designed and professional-grade style manual...

> Other free ebooks (which PG has already been highlighted as being in that category) don’t put much effort into professional-quality typography

It can be a very difficult task to compare without criticism. It’s clear that SE does put care and attention in to all the things mentioned with the goal of creating an excellent edition, I just think that PG has well-earned the respect they have for doing what they do well: getting so many books in to so many hands. As highlighted in the page and in your comments here: PG and SE fill different needs so there is room for both to stand tall.




That doesn't strike me as "bashing", it strikes me as contrasting different focuses.

PG is going for breadth—as many public domain books on as many devices as possible. Standard Ebooks are going for depth—a very quality of typesetting for each book.


Bashing? The goals of each project are different and compliment each other. I am almost positive the folks at PG encourage projects like Standard Ebooks.




Join us for AI Startup School this June 16-17 in San Francisco!

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: