Update 2007/04/28, 11:59 MDT: The OpenReader site is back online, and the “malware” has been removed. Somehow a bunch of links to bad sites and a bad-actor counter got added. They’ve been removed with the help of James “KodeKrash” Linden, who is also now tracking down how the bad stuff got there in the first place. He says avoid using canned CMS like Mambo if possible, a sentiment with which I agree. Now to get the Google bad flag removed for all search results which bring up OpenReader pages. – Jon Noring

Badware has infested the OpenReader site, and it’s down to protect visitors. Earlier I suspended my efforts for OpenReader for unrelated reasons, but I hope that founder Jon Noring can get the site cleaned up and online again. Any security-savvy volunteers ready to help him?

The bigger picture: OpenReader badly needs to end up in the hands of librarians or others with an interest in getting the IDPF to do standards for real—that could be a new mission for the group. Hello, Peter Brantley and friends?

2 COMMENTS

  1. While I agree with the goals of OpenReader wholeheartedly, the implementation leaves a bit to be desired.

    With regard to the website, it is interesting; it reminds me of an e-book, in that the content is never updated. In fact, this blog often has more information on what is going on with the project. The website doesn’t even mention the fact that it was hacked, or, more importantly, warn users that my have visited when the website contained “badware”.

    If the organization wants to succeed, it may have to realize that the “little things” like maintaining a website count for a lot.

  2. Thanks. I agree with most all of the above. The implementation has been a disaster. OSoft, the supposed first implementer, was to talk up the standard, but instead played up the dotReader format without even putting an “OpenReader Coming” logo on the dotReader home page.

    I wish OpenReader leader Jon Noring had done more in the enforcement and implementation areas–I think it was outrageous when OSoft was allowed to let people confuse the dotReader and OpenReader formats. For this reason, I’ve stopped formally evangelizing for OpenReader even though it’s technically superior to the IDPF standard.

    Since many major players in the book business insist on operating within the IDPF, one solution would be for OpenReader to shift its mission and advocate its better approach within an established forum.

    On another point, even when I was evangelizing, I lacked time to do both this blog and OpenReader’s. Volunteers from the open source community would have been nice (Jon himself can do only so much). Result from a lack of volunteers? Yes–a static, out-of-date site that might as well be a p-book. Interestingly, however, the TeleBlog reaches many more people than OpenReader and the IDPF site.

    Wanna volunteer to maintain the OpenReader site? Or help Jon with the OpenReader e-mail list? Or help round up support from academics and librarians? Or do fund-raising if you have the right connections? That would be great. I’d really like to new leadership at OpenReader—better funded, better focused. Jon is now busy with work for DigitalPulp Publishing. Meanwhile he deserves our praise for what he started, and he remains an important resource for the e-book community—via his eBook Community list and in other ways.

    Meanwhile I’m hoping he’ll give us a detailed analysis of the IDPF standards (core format and container) as they now stand.

    Thanks,
    David

The TeleRead community values your civil and thoughtful comments. We use a cache, so expect a delay. Problems? E-mail newteleread@gmail.com.