On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 13:23:42 -0800 (PST), Andrew Sly <sly@victoria.tc.ca> wrote: | | | On Thu, 11 Nov 2004, Jon Noring wrote: | | > Let me clarify (again) below, what I wrote in a separate message. You | > may still reject it, but PG's past carelessness and looseness leads to | > legitimate questions about the accuracy and acceptance of the pre-DP- | > era texts. "Corrupt" may be a strong word (and inaccurate), but not | > placing "textual integrity" as #1 (including the perception of textual | > integrity) is simply wrong. Note that perceptions are just as real as | > reality itself. | | | I would be careful about making a distinction between pre and post | DP-era texts. Since the creation of DP, there have been countless | texts added to the PG collection from other sources, without page | images saved, or indication of exact editions used. | | Project Gutenberg has always been open to accepting texts from | any source, as long as they can be copyright-cleared. I don't | see any likelihood of this changing. So all you volunteers who have specialized interests and want Out of Copyright books about your special interest available forever. Get working. -- Dave F