Hi Al, Yes, they were discussed. It was shown that the FAQs, and to put it politely the FAQs are in adequate, misleading and incomplete. In others words they do not describe current practices or policies! What we have learned: 1) the acceptance of handcrafted ebooks is up to the WWs 2) the WWs do not have a set of rules for accepting ebooks 3) the WWs consesus of what is acceptable is not availible publicly 4) there are not guidelines for submitters to verify that their submissions will most likely be accepted. 5) Many have ideas have an idea how the ebooks should be formatted, yet no concise guidelines exist. 6) RST is the proclaimed master format 7) Guidelines are missing of preferable mark up inside of RST at least they are to rudimentary. 8) Guidelines and specifications are missing for creating tools. So that the can be tested to see if they are adequate or acceptable. 9) the existing tools do not have specifications to test against, nor do they fully follow all rules and policies that are somehow considered to be existent. 10) existing tools are not well suited for the uninformed 11) there is a preference for web-based tools So what we have is an aristocratic anarchy. Privileged few that do what they consider is best, without them truly stating the rules of the game or necessarily abiding by what is proclaimed to be what is going on! regards Keith. P.S. The truth of above statements are in the threads of the past month or so! The matter is futile to debate, because it has already been debated "ad absurdum". Keith Am 09.03.2012 um 04:32 schrieb Al Haines:
Discussion of what is or is not an "ebook" I leave to others.
PG's submission standards have been discussed/described/argued about in other threads in this forum. There's more information in PG's various FAQ's at http://www.gutenberg.org/wiki/Category:FAQ.
I can't speak to questions about PG's software and the maintenance thereof.
Al