Comments on: Klencke Atlas – The Largest Book in the World http://www.neatorama.com/2010/02/07/klencke-atlas-the-largest-book-in-the-world/ The Neat Side of the Web Thu, 16 Feb 2012 18:34:24 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: wow http://www.neatorama.com/2010/02/07/klencke-atlas-the-largest-book-in-the-world/comment-page-1/#comment-1907033 wow Mon, 08 Feb 2010 00:01:18 +0000 http://www.neatorama.com/?p=29333#comment-1907033 if that books 5 feet then those are some little people... if that books 5 feet then those are some little people…

]]> By: pyrit http://www.neatorama.com/2010/02/07/klencke-atlas-the-largest-book-in-the-world/comment-page-1/#comment-1907028 pyrit Sun, 07 Feb 2010 23:21:05 +0000 http://www.neatorama.com/?p=29333#comment-1907028 It's too big for its boot(s). It’s too big for its boot(s).

]]> By: NorwegianBlue http://www.neatorama.com/2010/02/07/klencke-atlas-the-largest-book-in-the-world/comment-page-1/#comment-1907014 NorwegianBlue Sun, 07 Feb 2010 22:22:11 +0000 http://www.neatorama.com/?p=29333#comment-1907014 Amazing that even though it first moved to the British Museum over 180 years ago it has never been publicly displayed with it's pages open. I find it irritating when publicly funded museums keep treasures hidden away. The public own them, the public have a right to see them. Museums do not, or at least should not, exist to store items only for academic study. BTW while the Grauniad is well known for its typographical errors, however surely their proof readers should have spotted that 1.75m is not 5 feet. Amazing that even though it first moved to the British Museum over 180 years ago it has never been publicly displayed with it’s pages open. I find it irritating when publicly funded museums keep treasures hidden away. The public own them, the public have a right to see them. Museums do not, or at least should not, exist to store items only for academic study.

BTW while the Grauniad is well known for its typographical errors, however surely their proof readers should have spotted that 1.75m is not 5 feet.

]]>