Sigh. I don't know what the solution is, but for me as a content-provider it is heart-breaking to do my best to try to "do the job right" and then see the hard-won knowledge and effort I have put into "doing it right" thrown away BOTH by the txt and the html as implemented by PG. I'd love to see an input format that preserves the hard-won effort I put into content creation, AND which is NOT a "write once" format, such that future content producers can easily build on the efforts I have already put into creating a correct content creation, and NOT have to redo the work I have already done because BOTH txt and html as implemented by PG throw away work effort I have already done. Yes, it is possible for future content producers to go over the text front to back another three or four passes after I have done so already in order to try to "catch" again the errors that txt and html have re-introduced -- but why would anyone want that they should have to do so? What I would like to see as an input-submission format is something that: 1) Preserves the hard-won effort I have already put into content creation, such that a future volunteer can build on my work without having to "reverse engineer" those gratuitous errors currently being introduced by the current PG use of txt and html. 2) Works well-enough even with commonly available "bottom feeder" tools. [[Personally I get tired of claims of "magic bullet" tools and then I spend a day trying to get them to work on my computer and they don't even install and run correctly.]] 3) Does simple common tasks in a simple transparent way. 4) Isn't ugly or ungainly for simple common everyday tasks. 5) Can be -- and is in practice -- transformed from input format to a variety of end reader formats in an attractive manner which does not contain common uglinesses for common book situations.