Crossword E52 TV Listings E35 Public Lives B2 Weather D8 Correction: April 16, 2000, Sunday A brief report in the News Summary on Friday about a judge's order blocking the city from awarding $104 million in welfare-to-work contracts to Maximus, a Virginia company, referred incorrectly in some copies to the origin of the lawsuit in State Supreme Court in Manhattan.
There are many copies of The Origin of Species online: nonetheless, as I will explain, all fail to meet standards which both general and scholarly readers ought to expect to be satisfied by a digital work suitable for everyday use.
Alternative outcomes include the loss of one of the copies or the origin of a new, positively selected function (which we called "neofunctionalization") (Ohno 1970; Force et al. 1999).
Proofreaders check for typos and format mistakes working only with the translated copy and then by comparison with the initial copy in the origin language.
In this way, the reader can have a copy of the Origin much like someone in 1859 would have had: the PDF copy is composed of high-quality photographic reproductions of a copy of the 1859 Origin.
Browsing the scanned copy of the Origin, users of the site are given the option of downloading the PDF copy.
A second criterion that a good digital copy of the Origin ought to meet is that it be authoritative.
The digital copy of the Origin in the PDF format is only part of the new edition or perhaps, one of the many products or results of a larger digital entity that better deserves the title "digital text".
In a comprehensive survey, the results of which are reported in the editor's introduction to the digital edition at the Darwin Manuscripts Project, no copy of The Origin of Species meets the criteria sketched above.
A good digital copy of the Origin should be authoritative, clear as to the edition and to the publisher that produced the book represented online, easy to read, and easy to obtain in both digital and print forms.
