i18n@... wrote:

>
> Jonathon Blake wrote:
>
> > a) I doubt that Adobe/O'Reilly could recoup the cost of the offer
> > within five years. [O'Reilly has a policy of flipping all books to a
> > CC 2.0 Licence five years after publication.]
> >
> > b) I don't know what sort of royalty arrangement Peter has, but I
> > expect that financially, it is much better than any royalty
> > arrangement that involves the CC 2.0 Licence.
> >
> I don't know about the CC policy - never heard that - where are all the
> old books? There are some I would download in a minute! Hmm, just looked
> at the web site : http://www.oreilly.com/openbook/
>
> Looks like it is always the author's choice, and then only for already
> out of print books.
>
> But I think you missed my bigger points:
>
> 1 - Adobe would provide the majority of funding, probably for the same
> reasons and from a similar budget that Ken Lunde and his team have been
> paid from for about 10 years or more. Their justification is that that
> it is R and D that turns into products and features.

I've seen nothing to suggest that Adobe is interested in exotics.
Monotype is.

That Adobe would kill off the one application that can be used for DTP
of large books, FrameMaker, indicates they're not interested in niche
markets at all.
--
Peter T. Daniels grammatim@...