Soft trial (redux)

After looking at the 22 (23?) responses I got from the Topica posting, the 5 or 6 I got at my LISNews journal, and the 2 I got here--and looking at the HTML versions themselves, with my browser set so it would really be obvious if the font setting was, um, less than consistent...

• I haven't made a decision yet, and almost certainly won't in time for C&I 5:4 (since that's entering the edit-and-copyfit stages). (Out later this week, most likely)
  
• I've posted a new set of html trials, using a different and even simpler methodology that I'm sure won't take more than 30-40 minutes per issue.
  
• Go to the C&I "All Contents" page, as before (pagination has been fixed), drop down to the bottom, and you'll find the new links.
  
• I'm nearly certain that these versions will display and print consistently on any Windows PCs with Book Antiqua installed (which should mean "any Windows PCs") and any browsers with font overrides in place. Mac printing should be consistent, but I have no idea what it will look like. It's still not pretty HTML, to be sure.
  
• If I do this, it's likely to use this methodology--and it's likely to be selective, as in: Leaving out Bibs & Blather, leaving out any article running more than 40% of the entire length of an issue, possibly leaving out articles that I don't believe make much sense out of context.
  

Given those notes, your opinion as to whether it's worth doing or not is still solicited--and if you haven't change your mind since commenting on the other trial, you don't need to comment again; I'll consider those comments in my final decision.

Once again, an important reminder: The PDF version will continue to be the most readable, most attractve, and most complete version of Cites & Insights.