Armstrong 626 nenewal!
 

In article , RJH wrote:

IME one of the worst people to proof is the author. I often miss things
that on hindsight would have been howlers. You could do worse than post
final drafts here?

In effect. I did! :-)

I agree that items generally do really benefit from 'someone else' to
proofread because the author often tends to read what they meant or thought
they wrote.

However one nice aspect of webpages is that I can easily correct/update/add
to them after they've appeared.

Hence I'm grateful when someone here or elsewhere points out my bloopers.
(Won't say 'pleased' as I try not to make the errors, but still make some.)
So although my main reason for posting about new pages is the hope that
people find them interesting I'm also looking for such corrections.

However for magazine articles I can't 'publish' before the magazine. So can
only show their drafts to someone else in confidence. Fortunately, the
magazine editors then pick up the silly errors. They sometimes get worse
input than mine, so I don't stand out too much! 8-]

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html