Re: Frankenstein

The various "frankNN.txt" versions ended with frank15.txt.  To my
knowledge, PG never had a published "version 16", i.e. a file named
frank16.txt.  When I reposted frank15.txt into the post10K structure in
2008, I made a copy of it named frank16.txt strictly as a local working
file.  That frank16.txt file, and the frank16.htm file I generated from
it, were then processed by PG's posting software to create the published
84.txt and 84-h.htm fileset.  If there's another frank16.txt file out
there somewhere, it didn't come from me.



> -----Original Message-----
> From: gutvol-d-bounces-4LCm/o+qPMZ96Xl/[email protected] 
> [mailto:gutvol-d-bounces-4LCm/o+qPMZ96Xl/[email protected]] On Behalf Of Lee Passey
> Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 12:50 PM
> To: gutvol-d-4LCm/o+qPMZ96Xl/[email protected]
> Subject: Re: [gutvol-d] Frankenstein
> 
> 
> On 11/28/2012 1:15 PM, Al Haines wrote:
> 
> >>> On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 10:38:23AM -0700, Lee Passey wrote:
> 
> >> This is great information. Can the list be made 
> searchable, so if I 
> >> have only the e-text number I can find the associated posting (or
> >> reposting)  message?
> 
> > Posting notes are archived by month/year.  They're ordered 
> by the date 
> > in which they were sent by the WWers, which is more or less in 
> > numerical order.  There are two exceptions: when etext numbers are 
> > reserved for future use and when an old, pre10K, etext is reposted.
> >
> > When a pre10K etext is reposted, its repost note appears in 
> the month 
> > in which the reposting WWer sent the repost note.
> >
> > Reservations occur when numbers are prerequested, usually 
> by DP, for a 
> > multi-volume set with cross-links.  Such reserved numbers may not 
> > actually get used/posted for some time, i.e. they might be 
> requested 
> > in June, but not actually be submitted/posted until several months 
> > later, depending on how long it takes to post-process the various 
> > volumes of the set.  Posting notes for reserved numbers 
> will appear in 
> > the month of posting, not the month of request.
> 
> A beautiful example of a non sequitur. The question was not 
> "how is the 
> list archive structured?" the question was "can it be made 
> searchable so 
> messages involving a specific e-text number can be found?" Of 
> course I 
> can download the zip file for every month of each of the past 3 years 
> (apparently the limit of the archive), extract each file from the 
> gzip/tar, and then grep for the number, but a web-based 
> interface would 
> be more user friendly.
> 
> >> When a work is reposted, is the prior version retained for 
> historical 
> >> purposes?
> >
> > Yes.  Etext #84 is a typical example.
> 
> Great. Can you point me to version 16 which existed in 2007, 
> and which 
> is a (the?) precursor to the current version? Were there 
> other versions 
> between 16 and the current version?
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> gutvol-d mailing list
> gutvol-d-4LCm/o+qPMZ96Xl/[email protected] 
> http://lists.pglaf.org/mailman/listinfo/gutvol> -d
> 

_______________________________________________
gutvol-d mailing list
gutvol-d-4LCm/o+qPMZ96Xl/[email protected]
http://lists.pglaf.org/mailman/listinfo/gutvol-d