From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Got any clue as to what the thread was titled so that I can dig it up in
the
> archives so as not to raise old issues?
Thanks for posting the links. Very kind of you, sir.
I reviewed both posts. I don't they address the issue I'm raising. The main view of both seemed to be that dumping all the OGC from a product into a single appendix or text file without any way for the user to figure out exactly where the OGC exists in the product (i.e., it's physical location, etc.) was the crux of the problem. Ryan, for instance, noted that the lack of ability for the end user to use a definition to find a specific physical instance of OGC might be problematic.
Imagine I have a duplicate image of the book, say a PDF, with all images (say images are PI for instance), and all text-PI replaced with ___ characters or placeholder boxes . Now you can, word for word, position for position, page by page unambiguously identify which parts of the volume were OGC and which weren't.
But I don't think that "all text in Chapter 5 is OGC except the parts which are PI" is per se any more or less clearly indicated than a reproduction of chapter 5 with place holders for the PI.
Do you see things differently?
Thanks for the input. Perhaps my query needed to be more clear.
Lee
