I wonder if I could drag the tone of this debate down a level or two to pragmatics. A few appends ago I may have used the phrase 'HTML master version' or something similar. This was never intended to imply that HTML could or should be used as a true master version from which any other format could be generated, merely that for a large group of basically simple PG works, with a certain amount of standardisation of markup it might be possible to generate acceptable text and epub files from a single HTML source, and thus that it might be possible to fairly easily improve the current rather unsatisfactory situation where the generated epubs make less than happy reading, without causing vast amounts of ongoing maintenance/update work by keeping multiple copies of the same work in step. This is essentially a piece of pragmatics, and is only relevant because currently PG has rather a lot of works which exist both in plain text and let's say unconstrained HTML formats and which, as someone else remarked and I have also experienced myself, it's not that difficult to re-work the HTML to generate much better epubs. The only reason I keep gently nagging away about this is that I am lazy and would like not to have to do this myself every time I want to read a PG book on one of my e-readers, and whilst adding them to MobileRead achieves a certain amount of sharing/access to reformatting done by others, it seems to me that if PG took this up a lot more sharing would be achieved. Just to repeat myself, I do not maintain that HTML is a better master format than TEI, RST, LateX, MathML, etc., merely that PG seems to me to have a lot more HTML than the other formats, and also that epub (aka zipped HTML) seems to be a more important format for the increasingly large group of people who want to read PG works on their e-readers. I don't expect The Powers That Be to experience a Damascene conversion to my way of thinking by reading this append, but having read recent arguments from others that images plus plain text is the way to standardise because there is no universally acceptable master format to standardise on, I thought I should make it clear that my advocacy of somewhat standardising the current large PG catalogue of HTML is not intended to imply anything general about the excellence or otherwise of HTML as a master document format. Bob Gibbins