While I agree more with BB's conjecture, than Don's I have seen no real statistical evidence on either side. My own experience, which is very old now, is of encountering titles in Palm-compatible formats that had manifestly been derived mechanically from the PG plain-text versions. This is just an anecdotal point, but it matches BB's "eucalyptus" data point. This doesn't seem to hard to research though. For grins I rummaged around for e-book versions of something I am familiar with. I found two separate conversions of _Sunshine Sketches_ by Leacock. Despite the existence of a nice HTML version by David Widger, both the PDF and HTML versions I found were based on the PG text version, using the text version of the TOC and having the double- hyphen version of M-dashes. So there's two more random data points in BB's column. On 14-Apr-2010 18:42, Bowerbird@aol.com wrote:
dakretz said:
How accurate is this assessment?
it's half-assed accurate.
============================================================ Gardner Buchanan <gbuchana@teksavvy.com> Ottawa, ON FreeBSD: Where you want to go. Today.