Thank you! I did try. Actually, Theresa Neilson-Hayden mentioned that it is VERY difficult for people to edit or proof Steve's novels....it is WAY too easy to get into the story and miss the errors. Realize that I am *still* not the last stop, nor is any editor or proofer. The typesetter gets it after us. A book goes through so many hands that, although that is more to catch errors, it is also more to create errors. Not only that, a manuscript may see five or six edits, due to changes and re-writes, before it ever gets to someone who is simply checking for little errors. Peace, Caliann Philip Hart <philiph at slac.stanford.edu> wrote: On Tue, 20 Apr 2004, David Goldfarb wrote: > While we're on the subject of proofreading, I'll offer up my list of > typoes that I noticed Isn't it "typos"? Anyway, I still think the proofreading (not "proof-reading"? Ok, now I'm seeing "proo freading") of _TEoDM_ was quite good esp. compared to the earlier Paarfiad volumes. For which I thank those resp. for it. "Offense theives. -- they take it when it isn't offered." --Tom Digby --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Photos: High-quality 4x6 digital prints for 25¢