marcello said:
That may not be simple but is still better than what you have now: if the txt file happens to lack the page numbers there is no way you could get them short of redoing the book.
you wouldn't need to "redo the book" to insert page number information. and if the .html file had that information, you could do it automatically. and if page-number information _was_ included in the text-file, i would support it in my viewer-program. so tony, or any other user, could simply toggle its display on or off, by choosing a menu-item. it's ridiculous to have users go through all the difficulty of doing a conversion to access such a simple and basic piece of information. y'all should step back and look at yourselves for even suggesting it. and why should the text-file "happen to lack the page numbers" in the first place? that kind of terminology makes it sound so "accidental". distributed proofreaders retains page-number information through all of its processes, because, get this, they find it's useful to them. but then they drop it from the final product! why? don't they realize that someone else might find it useful? of course they do, that's why people have started _retaining_ it (i almost said "including" it, but that's the same type of error) in the .html versions. but nonetheless, it is still dropped from the text-file. just like the information about the names of image-files and their correct placement. it's as if there was a conscious attempt to make the text-files as useless as possible. and what will the users at large think when they are informed that this policy is in place? i don't know for sure, but i'm gonna find out. -bowerbird