greg said:
>   typos or fixes or additional master formats
>   can be contributed

you want people to fix typos without reference to a scan?
please tell me that you didn't just suggest that seriously...

and how can a master format be made with any certainty
without full reference to a canonical version of the book?


>   The main features here mostly exist,
>   but not as flexibly as I'd like to see.

where do any of these "main features" of customization
exist -- not just "mostly" -- but in any form whatsoever?


>   These, and others, have also been discussed deeply.

don't be ridiculous, greg.  these issues have "been discussed"
repeatedly, but they have never been discussed "deeply" at all.
they have never come to anything actionable, usually because
people here drag these threads all over the back-40 acres, and
then drag in dead field-mice from the neighboring homestead
and plop them smack-dab into the middle of every discussion.
surely most of this crap would earn a "c" grade in your courses,
and even _that_ assessment is probably being far too generous.

the discussions weren't even "shallow"...  perhaps "superficial".
(but even that implies they were on-topic.  but no, usually not.)


>   These can be better than automatically-generated versions

oh please.  haven't you learned anything from the "snowflakes"?

hand-crafted versions are simply impossible to keep up-to-date.
impossible.  totally and completely.  and now you want to _invite_
users to submit as many snowflakes as we possibly can?  insanity.

are you really in charge of this project?  if so, i fear for its future...

-bowerbird