dakretz said:
Great news! Let's test this thesis. ... etext # 200, dated "1995-01-01". ... Can anyone from DP tell me how to get the scans?
ok, two things... first, it looks like i was wrong when i said that d.p. had stopped maintaining the "ols", so of course my "reason" for their having stopped maintaining it was also incorrect. (or one could say it's _no_longer_ correct, but i do believe it was correct at one time.) at any rate:
it claims 16,809 "unique books". whether that means 16,809 scansets, i do not know. but the scans for pg#31946 are right there, online... second, the scan-sets from the very earliest books were said to be "inconvenient to get to right now" at one point in time. whether they were located or lost to the wind, i don't know. but that _could've_ included pg#200. the lowest p.g. numbers which are shown as being included in "ols" presently are pg#460 and pg#464, and four without any number. but are you sure that d.p. actually digitized pg#200? -bowerbird