james said:
>   My two monitors at home have
>   a maximum resolution of
>   1440x900 and 1360x768 respectively.

that's good to know.  i can plan for that.


>   I would guess that very few of us have
>   monitors of high enough resolution that
>   we could view a page image without scrolling
>   and have that page image be readable.

i'm lucky to have a very big screen, and i know
that  makes me out-of-touch with many people;
that's why i try to make sure to ask these things.

perhaps you could send me a screenshot where
you have arranged things to be optimal for you?

another thing to keep in mind is that you won't
actually be _reading_ the scans, not per se, but
only referring to them as your reference-point.

i know it's tough to let that go, mentally, but do it!

when the time comes for a word-by-word proofing,
the arrangements can be different.  but that's later.


>   your software messes up some UTF-8 characters.
>   (If you can't read what I typed, it was a capital'S'
>   with an accent acute above it).

um, that was an intentional change that i made,
because something is getting screwed up in utf8.
i haven't done enough sleuthing to know whether
it's on your end or mine, but it ain't validating...
(well, it only gives a warning, not an error, but...)

but we'll get to that later...


>     Third, your "smaller" button does not work.
>     It seems to advance the page instead.

oops!  i'll fix that.  in the meantime, the number
in the small box between "smaller" and "fetch"
is the text-size-percentage, change it and then
press "fetch" and find the optimum value for you.


>   Fourth, your "good fit" example shows
>   what many Hindus would consider to be
>   the most important page in the whole book.

i didn't know that.


>   You must be a very old soul.

i've been told that, a good many times.

-bowerbird