Munkres' Topology: 2nd Edition Spine Misprint?

  • Thread starter Thread starter altcmdesc
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Munkres Topology
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The forum discussion centers on a misprint found on the spine of the 2nd edition of Munkres' Topology, specifically the phrase "Secon Edition" instead of "Second Edition." Users are inquiring whether this misprint is consistent across all copies of the second edition or if it varies by printing. The conversation highlights the importance of verifying print quality in academic texts and encourages users to check their own copies for similar discrepancies.

PREREQUISITES
  • Familiarity with Munkres' Topology, 2nd Edition
  • Understanding of book printing processes
  • Knowledge of common typographical errors in publications
  • Basic awareness of academic publishing standards
NEXT STEPS
  • Investigate the printing history of Munkres' Topology, 2nd Edition
  • Research common typographical errors in academic texts
  • Explore forums or communities discussing book misprints
  • Learn about the impact of print quality on academic resources
USEFUL FOR

Students, educators, and collectors of mathematical literature, particularly those interested in the accuracy and quality of academic publications.

altcmdesc
Messages
64
Reaction score
0
I have no idea where else to ask this:

I have the 2nd edition of the book and I noticed that on the spine of the book it says "Secon Edition" instead of "Second". I'm just wondering if this is on every copy of the second edition of the book? Or, is your copy like this?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Mine says "Second"!
 
Maybe they're different printings.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
8K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
6K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K