Thread: Spelling Macro
View Single Post
Old 12-11-2008, 12:55 PM   #34
tompe
Grand Sorcerer
tompe ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tompe ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tompe ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tompe ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tompe ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tompe ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tompe ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tompe ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tompe ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tompe ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tompe ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Posts: 7,452
Karma: 7185064
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Linköpng, Sweden
Device: Kindle Voyage, Nexus 5, Kindle PW
Quote:
Originally Posted by HarryT View Post
Most of our books come from PG sources, and PG specifically say that they do not aim to make their books conform to a specific edition or source, and that often they use multiple sources. It's generally, therefore, not easy to answer the question "what edition does this come from".

When I proof-read books against a specific edition, I generally say in my comments what that edition is. When I've been proof-reading Dickens (my favourite author) using "Google Books" scans, I've been surprised to see just how very different the different editions are in terms of punctuation, spelling, and even, on occasions, the actual text itself.
I really think that the origin (PG in most cases) should be noted. I did not know that PG did not care about the edition. I really appreciate when it is noted which edition it has been proof read against (as i think you do).
tompe is offline   Reply With Quote