We consumers aren't satisfied with one error every other page, much less glaring errors all over the place that indicates your figure of 99% is far too optimistic for the industry at large.
If you're not satisfied with one error every other page (99.9% accuracy), you should never get in a car or get on a plane.
And as far as the industry at large, honestly I don't care if other companies have huge numbers of typos. I'm not responsible for their books, I'm responsible for mine. If my books have a 99.9% accuracy rating and everyone else's have 95%, it just makes mine look that much better.
My solution is simple:
Sell or give the public a PDF preview copy of all supplements.
Only print the final copy after at least six weeks of general discussion and typo reporting.
Let's take Seekers of Secrets as an example. Our to-press date for that is 4/3/09, which means we have to have our PDFs ready for the printer on that date. The printing turnaround time is over a month because they're printed in China and have to be shipped here; we expect to have copies of this book in the warehouse and ready for sale on 6/1/09.
So you'd like to push back the availability of that book for seven weeks? 6 weeks for reporting typos, one week to enter them and give everything another edit pass to make sure no text has reflowed weird or anything like that. So a book that we commissioned in November 2008, with the text due from the authors in January, actually hits the shelves in mid-July?
And I guarantee you, the typical book would still have typos in it, despite this process.
And our authors, who get paid *after* the book is printed, wouldn't get paid until at least August or September.
I don't know what kind of business you're in, but the idea of someone doing work today and getting paid for it ten months later is... strange. :)
(Putting on my amateur businessman hat....) And even discounting the authors (back to work, freelancer scum!!! ;)), a business needs cash to operate, and your plan means the gap between the start of a project and when the company gets money for the project is widened, which means we either have to cut corners or operate on credit. And you see how well our current economy is...
I don't think it's feasible.
Then again, I'm not the guy who makes financial decisions about the company. The people who do make those decisions may have a different opinion.
Did you read Sean's LJ entry...? :)
Yes, although I fail to grasp your point Zapp. :)
I do believe SKR has refuted your points succinctly, both in his 'livejournal' and now here.
EDIT: Having now read your thread on that forum, I believe that while you mean well, the idea is simply not going to have any sustainable merit unless you somehow plan to bankroll the man-hours of labor that task would involve beyond what is already in place. And having openly-accessible PDF documents for public access sounds like a 'Really Bad Idea', especially since documents such as these are not copyrighted until after they are in final form.
I don't know what kind of business you're in, but the idea of someone doing work today and getting paid for it ten months later is... strange. :)
Not to mention the reduced demand for the final product due to complete free previews.
Well, he did mention selling the PDF as a possibility. Even so, it's still pushing a big chunk of a product's revenue until much later.
...surely you see the signs written in the sky as clearly as I do? :)
... the occasional lunatic.
Thanks for your reply, but you know that isn't fair. How did six weeks become ten months?
Writers are already paid very late in the process.
Seekers: text commissioned on 11/3/08
Author deadline: 1/5/09
Product goes to press: 4/3/09
Product available in warehouse: 6/1/09
Author tentative payment date: publication + 60 days = 8/1/09
So already the author gets paid 7 months after they're done writing. You want to push that back by 6 weeks, plus 1 week to enter changes and get signoffs done, so 9/12/09... close to 9 months after they finish the project, or more than ten months since they started the project.
The writers are paid late because the company doesn't get paid until the book goes on sale. Which I mentioned in my last post.
Besides, even one week of public scrutiny would (for popular products) uncover valuable errors/balancing_mistakes/typos.
And open up a can of worms with people debating the merits of X vs. Y, people reporting things that aren't errors, and so on.
You know as well as I do that fans can work 24 hour shifts and be at least as knowledgeable as the designers themselves,
Please, tell me what else you're "at least as" good at compared to me? :)
And while it is true I don't know exactly how much time the editor is given to correct errors, no time at all would be lost if this scrutiny would take place in parallel.
Except it's not in parallel, it's after the book has had its current editing passes. Which means someone (either the developer or the editor) has to take time out of their schedule to go back to a book that, in theory, was finished.
Of course, if your starting-point is that you're unwilling to change, then the problems easily overshadow the possibilities. And I'm certainly not surprised if your argument is "the book trade is a conservative lot"...
It's not that I'm unwilling to change. It's that I don't feel the benefits outweigh the costs and other associated problems. We still fiddle with text in the copyedit phase--"oh, this should be an' oaken bureau' rather than an 'oak burea'"--and introducing more passes just gives people more chances to do little fiddles that don't really raise the "correctness level" of the book by a significant amount (99.5% to 99.6%, if that). As I said, even with 6 weeks of public review, there would still be errors in the text that people wouldn't notice. In working on the PFRPG Bestiary, I noticed things in the D&D 3.5 Monster Manual that were flat-out *wrong* and not corrected in any errata document 3 years after the book was released. Everyone missed them. The number of "errors" a public pass like this would find would be small, and incomplete, and add extra effort and delay to a book.
But my point is that consumers are about to realize this opportunity is real, and demand a change.
Alternately, start your own publishing company, try this model, and see how well it works for you.
I'm not trying to be dismissive here, I've given this idea some thought, but (as I pointed out in my blog entry, and my first post here, and this post) no matter how much you try to refine the output, the law of diminishing returns applies, and you reach a point where hours spent looking at a finished book would be better spent getting an almost-finished book finished.
And open up a can of worms with people debating the merits of X vs. Y, people reporting things that aren't errors, and so on[?]
Ooo...that'd be fun. I bet we know people who'd be interested in that, too.
:D
|
Thanks for your reply, but you know that isn't fair. How did six weeks become ten months?
Writers are already paid very late in the process.
Seekers: text commissioned on 11/3/08
Author deadline: 1/5/09
Product goes to press: 4/3/09
Product available in warehouse: 6/1/09
Author tentative payment date: publication + 60 days = 8/1/09
That made absolutely no sense at all, until I realised you Americans write the date wrong way round.
For those of us who like to keep things neat and orderly, in a heirarchy of small/medium/large (dd/mm/yyyy), that would read:
Seekers: text commissioned on 3/11/08
Author deadline: 5/1/09
Product goes to press: 3/4/09
Product available in warehouse: 1/6/09
Author tentative payment date: publication + 60 days = 1/8/09
Much clearer now. Maybe it's the mangled date format that causes some people confusion over the length of the process?
:)
That made absolutely no sense at all, until I realised you Americans write the date wrong way round.
For those of us who like to keep things neat and orderly, in a heirarchy of small/medium/large (dd/mm/yyyy),
It's not the wrong way round! We write it the way we read it: March 11th, 2009 becomes 3/11/09. Heirarchy has nothing to do with it.
The following should not be considered legal advice, but I'm 99% certain that American copyright laws apply to any form of a work, not just the 'final' version.
|
It's not the wrong way round! We write it the way we read it: March 11th, 2009 becomes 3/11/09. Heirarchy has nothing to do with it.That made absolutely no sense at all, until I realised you Americans write the date wrong way round.
For those of us who like to keep things neat and orderly, in a heirarchy of small/medium/large (dd/mm/yyyy),
But you don't say "March 11th", you say "the 11th of March". Well I do.
But you don't say "March 11th", you say "the 11th of March". Well I do.It's not the wrong way round! We write it the way we read it: March 11th, 2009 becomes 3/11/09. Heirarchy has nothing to do with it.That made absolutely no sense at all, until I realised you Americans write the date wrong way round.
For those of us who like to keep things neat and orderly, in a heirarchy of small/medium/large (dd/mm/yyyy),
Actually, most people I know do say the month first when talking about a date. The 11th of March would sound a little odd if I heard someone say it that way. Understandable, but odd.
The following should not be considered legal advice, but I'm 99% certain that American copyright laws apply to any form of a work, not just the 'final' version.
I'm worried that the version submitted for copyright is what is protected.
'Course, I suppose I could be confusing trademark for copyright ... hrm ...
|
|
Besides, even one week of public scrutiny would (for popular products) uncover valuable errors/balancing_mistakes/typos.
And open up a can of worms with people debating the merits of X vs. Y, people reporting things that aren't errors, and so on.
You really want to get advice on spelling and grammar, from random people on the Internet?
LOLI can just see it now; a thousand posts, denouncing the spelling of 'Rogue', as 'everyone it's spelt 'rouge'....'
As I said, even with 6 weeks of public review, there would still be errors in the text that people wouldn't notice. In working on the PFRPG Bestiary, I noticed things in the D&D 3.5 Monster Manual that were flat-out *wrong* and not corrected in any errata document 3 years after the book was released. Everyone missed them.
They've spelt 'armour' and 'colour' wrong in every edition!
LOL
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 8
|
Actually, most people I know do say the month first when talking about a date. The 11th of March would sound a little odd if I heard someone say it that way. Understandable, but odd.But you don't say "March 11th", you say "the 11th of March". Well I do.It's not the wrong way round! We write it the way we read it: March 11th, 2009 becomes 3/11/09. Heirarchy has nothing to do with it.That made absolutely no sense at all, until I realised you Americans write the date wrong way round.
For those of us who like to keep things neat and orderly, in a heirarchy of small/medium/large (dd/mm/yyyy),
Gunpowder, treason and plot.
I see no reason why gunpowder, treason
Should ever be forgot...
I'm worried that the version submitted for copyright is what is protected.
'Course, I suppose I could be confusing trademark for copyright ... hrm ...
Submitting a work for copyright is unnecessary (for American copyrights.) It is automatically copyrighted the instant it is created.
It is possible to file to copyright a work, in which case it is a Registered Copyright and applies specifically to the version of the work submitted. Registered copyrights are easier to defend in court, because there is an official record of the work, and you can extract greater damages from a violating party, but an ordinary copyright still exists on any previous versions of the same work.
Trademarks can work in a similar manner: Something is a trademark as soon as you announce an intent to use it as such (and it doesn't infringe on a previous mark.) It is additionally possible to register a trademark (for instance, in the disclaimer at the bottom of the page, registered trademarks and ordinary trademarks are listed separately.)
Once again, the above should not be construed as legal advice. Merely things I recall from an Intellectual Property seminar. I am not a lawyer, and my memory has been known to be faulty.
Personally, as someone who writes his own modules, and who has even had a couple of things published, I have mad respect for the quality of work produced by publishers like Wizards and Paizo. Granted, I'm fully aware that they don't always get the stat blocks exactly right, that some of their words are mispelled, and that their sentences are sometimes an almalgamation of two different passes at the same sentence. However, considering how many mistakes I find in my own writing, even after it's been edited, I think it's a wonder that these publishers are as accurate as they are.
|
|
I'm worried that the version submitted for copyright is what is protected.
'Course, I suppose I could be confusing trademark for copyright ... hrm ...
Submitting a work for copyright is unnecessary (for American copyrights.) It is automatically copyrighted the instant it is created.
Maybe if you're a writer, but I'm not sure about artists. I'm not totally sure where the Orphan Works Act went, but if it ended up getting passed in the form I last saw it in, guys like me are bum-f#&+ed.
As an aside, I have noticed precious few typos in Pathfinder products, and no serious ones. However, I've seen some humorous ones in the Planet Stories books. For example, "footfalls" being replaced by "footballs," and "soldier" replaced by either "solder" or "solider."
Understand that the Planet Stories books have an extra step in the process: a typist manually retypes the book from an existing print copy of the book, as most of those old pulps were manually typeset and therefore there are no e-files to yoink. So sometimes errors creep in there, too, and while we try to check every single one against the original print copy... sometimes the print copy has errors from the original publication. :p
Understand that the Planet Stories books have an extra step in the process: a typist manually retypes the book from an existing print copy of the book, as most of those old pulps were manually typeset and therefore there are no e-files to yoink. So sometimes errors creep in there, too, and while we try to check every single one against the original print copy... sometimes the print copy has errors from the original publication. :p
Maybe I'm naive, but I thought there'd be some sort of software to convert those books into an e-file. Surely, the font is recognizable enough that this is possible.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 6
|
Maybe I'm naive, but I thought there'd be some sort of software to convert those books into an e-file. Surely, the font is recognizable enough that this is possible.
I'd expect OCR to come out with more errors than a good typist. It may well be as fast or cheap, including proofing, to just manually enter the book with reduced errors.*
And coming back to the point of the thread: I don't think public/limited proofreading and balance checking would help all that much, especially relative to the delays it would introduce into the process. I appreciate the insights into the process provided.
* I should clarify: OCR on old materials, not printed on the best quality paper/ink to begin with :) Just doesn't strike me as an ideal situation.
Maybe I'm naive, but I thought there'd be some sort of software to convert those books into an e-file. Surely, the font is recognizable enough that this is possible.
There is, but it's so far been deemed more expensive than it's worth for our needs, and even with the programs that I've used, errors creep in at a pretty astounding rate...
Plus, the typist we use is a big Planet Stories fan. :)
|
Understand that the Planet Stories books have an extra step in the process: a typist manually retypes the book from an existing print copy of the book, as most of those old pulps were manually typeset and therefore there are no e-files to yoink. So sometimes errors creep in there, too, and while we try to check every single one against the original print copy... sometimes the print copy has errors from the original publication. :pMaybe I'm naive, but I thought there'd be some sort of software to convert those books into an e-file. Surely, the font is recognizable enough that this is possible.
A lot of tech I've used in the past for converting text to an e-file almost required a destruction of the book it came out of to make an accurate file. And even then there was a lot of editing that had to be done. The best you can really hope for is a good graphical scan which isn't helpful in this way. I ended up just typing entire works when I had to to get them on the computer (mostly stuff that had been done on a typewriter years ago) because of the inaccuracies. Just my 2cp
Well, there's another reason to like Paizo--they've got a human being employed doing something he/she enjoys, rather than a machine. :-)
A lot of tech I've used in the past for converting text to an e-file almost required a destruction of the book it came out of to make an accurate file. And even then there was a lot of editing that had to be done. The best you can really hope for is a good graphical scan which isn't helpful in this way. I ended up just typing entire works when I had to to get them on the computer (mostly stuff that had been done on a typewriter years ago) because of the inaccuracies. Just my 2cp
To be fair, destruction of the book is necessary for manual typing as well. Unless it's in a format that lays flat on its own (a really well bound hardcover or a spiral binding), you kinda have to chop the spine off so you can use it.
Not to steal Sutter's thunder, but I know he has to send a destructible copy to our typist for the novels. (On the subject of our typist, not only is she a fan, but she's also cheap! Which is why I like her. =)
Writers are already paid very late in the process.
Seekers: text commissioned on 11/3/08
Author deadline: 1/5/09
Product goes to press: 4/3/09
Product available in warehouse: 6/1/09
Author tentative payment date: publication + 60 days = 8/1/09
And that's when the RPG industry is running full steam working for a company that churns out a regular product. I turned in a final draft of something May '08 to a company that does not produce on a regular basis and thanks to hickups since 4E's announcement, it still isn't published. 10 months later and a revised GSL and Pathfinder license came out a week ago. So if it goes Pathfinder, I can revise the crunch, but it won't get published until after GenCon, (so I'll get paid like Oct). Or if it goes 4E, I can't help with the crunch since I don't know 4E so my wordcount drops and I get paid less.