about unpublished material

[H.W.Fluks@kpn.com]

Gilles wrote:

> So I only use to consider the *masters*'s unpublished ideas, 
> when it's possible...

I think that about sums up the ideas here: published material is more
important than unpublished material, but things Barks did are *always* more
important that things that other people did.

Ergo: unpublisheed Barks stuff is more important than *published* non-Barks
stuff.

That's at least what Gilles and Sigvald seem to find. And this does not
contradict Lars's points of view, if you're willing to regard Barks an
exception.

--Harry.