Suggestions from meta2

[funderburkjim]

In addition to the corrections mentioned in #16, the vcp-meta2 (AB response).txt file
contains some additional observations.

I'm copying those additional comments here for future consideration.

Here is the vcp-meta2.

[funderburkjim]

The additional comments

„ (\u201e) 2 := DOUBLE LOW-9 QUOTATION MARK
--------------------
line 3121 [Page 0065]  why?
<>SAstraM paWet„ dvija iti” ca . “sattvapraDAnA vaprAH syuriti
SAstraM paWet„ dvija iti” ca .	> शास्त्रं पठेत् द्विज” इति च ।

line 209897 [Page 2330]
<>viDitacCezavyatirekeRa BUtaYcedvastUpadiSati BavyArTa-
<>tvena„ kUwasTanityaM BUtaM nopadiSatItyatra ko hetuH .
tvena„ kUwasTanityaM BUtaM	> त्वेन, कूटस्थनित्यं भूतं

*****************
‘  (\u2018)   248 := LEFT SINGLE QUOTATION MARK
’  (\u2019)   249 := RIGHT SINGLE QUOTATION MARK
“  (\u201c) 76768 := LEFT DOUBLE QUOTATION MARK
”  (\u201d) 76493 := RIGHT DOUBLE QUOTATION MARK
--------------------
As there are quite many missings of quote marks in the text (as compared to the print), 
no point in trying to match the count differences for open and close marks.

*****************
<Picture> 71 : Diagrams in text
67 under क्षेत्र HW. (some were taken as single picture, being just besides each other by Cologne)
5 under खात HW.
1 under चित HW.
4 under छाया HW.
--------------------
None of these were incorporated in the html page displays.

*****************
The rest are 'Column' indicators for textual tabular arrays:
<C1>...<C12>
--------------------
Just a fraction of the tabular data is marked thus.
 
Scores of tables were typed as pure text with just "space separation", thus losing the "visibility".

[gasyoun]

As there are quite many missings of quote marks in the text (as compared to the print),
no point in trying to match the count differences for open and close marks.

Issue 1.

Scores of tables were typed as pure text with just "space separation", thus losing the "visibility".

Issue 2.

Both major.