--- Michael Hart <hart@pglaf.org> wrote:
As for identifying the eBooks with a particular paper edition, I think this should only be done in specific cases where the editions are known to be substantially different for reasons given in the newer editions.
We did this with Darwin, Shakespeare, etc., but I don't see the need to do it in cases in which the differences are all likely to be in typographical errors, margination, pagination, and other publishing items, rather than in the source material.
Most of us at DP disagree with you on this, and happily the whitewashers are now keeping the edition information that we add to the files we produce, instead of removing it. An increasing number of DP-produced texts (and, since DP produces the overwhelming majority of content contributed to PG, an increasing number of PG's recent texts) make note of edition information and page numbers at the very least. Hopefully once we move to the next iteration of our proofreading process we will be able to keep more information -- including markup of words/phrases which are missing or otherwise hard to read in the original. Several of DP's content providers, myself included, intend over the new few years to find decent editions of works already in PG, but which are not in a state that we would find acceptable if we were proofreading it ourselves (this includes most of the first few thousand texts). Hopefully over time we can update all PG's content to a standard we're happy with. -- Jon Ingram __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 250MB free storage. Do more. Manage less. http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250