[Next project] The Documents in the Case, by Dorothy L. Sayers and Robert Eustace

[David]

I'll be submitting my current project for review in the next day or so, so looking ahead to my next project.

I may regret this, but I'd like to try producing the Sayers and "Eustace" collaboration, _The Documents in the Case_ (1930).

PG: https://gutenberg.org/ebooks/77601

IA: https://archive.org/details/bwb_O6-BMX-852

Wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Documents_in_the_Case

It's an "epistolary novel", and there are a few aspects I'll need help with:

1. Sectioning - there are no "chapters", just two divisions of the letters.
2. The letters (and other documents) are consecutively numbered, 1., 2., 3., etc. I am guessing (based on this exemplar) that these "document" headings go to Roman, and are included in the ToC.
3. "Introduction" - comes before the first "division", but I don't think it's "frontmatter"? (i.e, no need for a half-title?)
4. A  good number of the "documents" aren't letters,  but statements or newspaper extracts; but I imagine these are sectioned *like* the letters (with appropriate semantics, of course).
   

Does this look okay? I don't have a repo yet, but it will be at:

https://github.com/dajare/dorothy-l-sayers_robert-eustace_the-documents-in-the-case

I'll update here when it's live on GitHub. (This is an HQ title, so there's already a project page for it.)

David / Fife, UK

[Alex Cabal]

OK, Lukas will manage with Robin reviewing.

I think each letter can go in its own file and we can call them each
"chapters" that are also letters. Regular chapter heading rules would apply.

You can still add a half title, see
https://standardebooks.org/ebooks/edgar-allan-poe/the-narrative-of-arthur-gordon-pym-of-nantucket
for a fictional preface that establishes a frame narrative

On 1/18/26 10:32 AM, David wrote:
> I'll be submitting my current project for review in the next day or so,
> so looking ahead to my next project.
>
> I may regret this, but I'd like to try producing the Sayers and
> "Eustace" collaboration, _The Documents in the Case_ (1930).
>
> PG: https://gutenberg.org/ebooks/77601
> IA: https://archive.org/details/bwb_O6-BMX-852
> Wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Documents_in_the_Case
>
> It's an "epistolary novel", and there are a few aspects I'll need help with:
>

> 1. Sectioning - there are no "chapters", just two divisions of the letters.
> 2. The letters (and other documents) are consecutively numbered, 1.,
> 2., 3., etc. I am guessing (based on this exemplar <https://
> standardebooks.org/ebooks/honore-de-balzac/letters-of-two-brides/r-
> s-scott/text>) that these "document" headings go to Roman, and are
> included in the ToC.
> 3. "Introduction" - comes before the first "division", but I don't

> think it's "frontmatter"? (i.e, no need for a half-title?)

> 4. A  good number of the "documents" aren't letters,  but statements or

> newspaper extracts; but I imagine these are sectioned *like* the
> letters (with appropriate semantics, of course).
>
> Does this look okay? I don't have a repo yet, but it will be at:
> https://github.com/dajare/dorothy-l-sayers_robert-eustace_the-documents-
> in-the-case
> I'll update here when it's live on GitHub. (This is an HQ title, so

> there's already a project page <https://standardebooks.org/ebooks/
> dorothy-l-sayers_robert-eustace/the-documents-in-the-case> for it.)
>
> David / Fife, UK
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "Standard Ebooks" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
> an email to standardebook...@googlegroups.com
> <mailto:standardebook...@googlegroups.com>.
> To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/
> standardebooks/7bc29e15-84ed-426f-9b78-313b51e036ecn%40googlegroups.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/
> standardebooks/7bc29e15-84ed-426f-9b78-313b51e036ecn%40googlegroups.com?
> utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.

[Alex Cabal]

Also that first edition dust jacket has excellent cover art, pity it's
not in the SE Style

[David]

I'll see if I can find something for the cover that at least evokes the first edition. We'll see!

Meanwhile, the github repo is now populated. I anticipate there being a LOT more manual markup with this than a "normal" production, so I may adopt a slightly different work-flow (proofing while adding manual semantics, perhaps).

Hopefully we'll get this over the line eventually. :)

[Igor Dikiy]

Maybe a treatment of Saint Jerome as in this painting? https://standardebooks.org/artworks/hendrick-ter-brugghen/saint-jerome

They often have a skull and books. 

[David]

Interesting suggestion, Igor - thanks! I'll keep that in mind when the time comes.

On Tuesday, 20 January 2026 at 05:10:50 UTC Igor wrote:

Maybe a treatment of Saint Jerome as in this painting? https://standardebooks.org/artworks/hendrick-ter-brugghen/saint-jerome

They often have a skull and books. 

On Monday, January 19, 2026 at 7:31:13 AM UTC-5 David wrote:

I'll see if I can find something for the cover that at least evokes the first edition. We'll see!

. . .

[David]

Hi Lukas - in the setup for this project, I assumed that the consecutively numbered "documents in the case" would be changed to Roman (as it our practice).

On at least four occasions, the documents are cross-referenced like this:

Would "statement No. 49" go to "statement No. LXIX"? or rather (as is my guess) we leave this as-is? I often guess wrong on these, so thought it worth checking.

Thanks!

[David Reimer]

(Or "XLIX", even ... doh.)

[Alex Cabal]

Hmm.. if they're frequently cross referenced like that then I think it
would be easier to read as decimal. So let's leave them like that in
this case.

On 1/20/26 9:07 AM, David Reimer wrote:
> (Or "XLIX", even ... doh.)
>
> On Tue, 20 Jan 2026 at 15:03, David <djre...@gmail.com
> <mailto:djre...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Hi Lukas - in the setup for this project, I assumed that the
> consecutively numbered "documents in the case" would be changed to
> Roman (as it our practice).
>
> On at least four occasions, the documents are cross-referenced like
> this:
>

> Screenshot from 2026-01-20 15-00-51.png
>
> Would "statement No. 49" go to "statement No. LXIX"? or rather (as
> is my guess) we leave this as-is? I often guess wrong on these, so
> thought it worth checking.
>
> Thanks!
>

> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "Standard Ebooks" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
> an email to standardebook...@googlegroups.com
> <mailto:standardebook...@googlegroups.com>.
> To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/

> standardebooks/CALCAaCBbrcn7-
> pc5%2BPS3t%3DLY__kbe0niTgjO2Rr%3Db52TQcmbOg%40mail.gmail.com <https://
> groups.google.com/d/msgid/standardebooks/CALCAaCBbrcn7-
> pc5%2BPS3t%3DLY__kbe0niTgjO2Rr%3Db52TQcmbOg%40mail.gmail.com?
> utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.

[Vince]

Should they be made links as well?

[Alex Cabal]

Hmm... I guess we could do that, though typically we only do that for
things like endnotes, which are outside of the actual text body.