0. The author’s name is written as शर्म्म at one place, but at all other places it is written शर्म/ शर्मा.

1. The text contains the regional slang at places, (i) प्रगट for प्रकट, (ii) रख & रक्ख both used, (iii) पाँच & पांच both used, … …; shouldn’t these be made uniform and consistent (editorial correction) within the document (at the least!), esp. when the Ambuda is aiming to become a ‘Standard’ resource, setting an example to others?

2. In many digitised texts on the web, as also here now, (a) noticed the ० (zero) for ॰ (लाघवचिह्न, abbreviation symbol) (b) the plain quote characters ‘…’ and “…”, for smart quotes ‘…’ and “…”. Though the quotes can mostly be replaced globally at once, the abbreviation mark needs some careful handling as a global correction.

3. The – (em dash) when used at a section header, should have a space afterwards; though as a separator for clauses/phrases in the running text, having a space on either side is optional.

4. In this text, the header अर्थ-- is used for the Hindi explanation, and as such should not have a visarga after the word (अर्थः–) which is used only in Sanskrit! [I had left the colon at many such places instead of correcting as a visarga, with this point in mind.]

5. The section headers are almost properly maintained in the first-half of the document, but not so in the second-half; shouldn’t this be ‘edited’ to make it uniform and consistent within the document?

Most probably, many such points can be put under the guidelines, once the strategy is decided.

The numbers in my above post are “lost”, so these are now at not so good to read!

The numbers are there; they just weren’t rendering correctly before. I’ve updated the site to render correctly.

As mentioned on Discord, I broadly agree with these points, except for (1) – I think we should bias toward being conservative toward the text, since it is easy to standardize/modernize it later with a program but hard to move in the other direction.