John Vandenberg wrote:
To be honest, this blogger is spot on. Our editions for these stories are terrible, usually being uploaded by one person from a crappy online edition, altered to partial conform to another crappy online edition of unknown provenance :- rinse and repeat, until we have a very crappy edition indeed.
That kind of criticism has also been voice against Google Book Search. But libraries still refuse to burn these inferior books. They're kept on shelves, side by side with good ones. Library catalogs seldom indicate the difference.
So, should Wikisource behave like a library or like a publisher that prints a new edition (with up-to-date foreword) of the book?
My opinion is that digitization projects should be digital libraries. But many readers seem to assume that digitization projects are publishers that try to "promote" every book they digitize.