What you have created is what MMP should produce. When I went to theology courses in college they had specific Bible software that used its own format as well as PDF's and you could any bible that they had or upload your own. The ones they had and they had them all, because it was open source so any church could make their bible available and most did. Any language fully searchable and able to be used for end notes and sourcing, added research guides,etc... MMP could make a software suite that was like an ASL vassal that took TPP created module for their products. It should just be as easy as a patch and any errata showed be fixed. My question is Errata always a fact of life every year. The software would have a fully functioning e version of the game. In order to play online you would have to have a code like any pc game, use it once type deal. I would say $30 would be fair across the board. It should be link-able or have native support for a fully searchable and visual Chapter H. It should all be illustrated. The issue I think is MMP is not a company composed of only people that do nothing but MMP stuff. It is a labor of love and they have a lot of other great games. I just do not think it is worth it for them to change anything. People who want to scan their scenarios into their own little database and the pocket rules help a lot with the bulk. The counter will never go away and if they made a product superior to vassal, they a fully 3d version with sprites and/or counters for Board-game simulator on Steam. Charge for the modules and just keep it in the middle so new and old players split the cost of production. Either way, Great system, MMP makes so many great games. Most players that would spend that much time making their own version of the rules probably does not need those rules often. Plus nowadays with Discord and those already answered and uploaded, you can get any rules question answered always, whenever.As someone who has played with an eASLRB for more than 20 years, I can say that in the current html format, I prefer it to the hardcopy rulebook. It is far easier to update errata (i.e., it is done electronically when the new errata is released and it is inserted exactly as it was intended into the rules). Since it is html, it is completely searchable using the browsers search function, although for the most part I rarely search that way (most likely due to 40+ years of playing SL/ASL and understanding the layout of the rulebook). With it in html, every rules reference is hyperlinked. It contains scanned pdfs of every scenario I own (with the exception of some very old TPP that will just wait until I retire), which right now means 1,998 linked scenarios. More importantly, it means when I go to a tournament I have ALL my paper on my laptop for reference. With the duffel of game counters and mapboards it is very handy to reduce weight and space by this method.
When a new product comes out, it is not very hard to update and add as necessary. In the case of errata, it is a text update in my editor and I am good to go. In the case of a new scenario pack, it is simply adding in the list of new scenarios, potential SSRs (like Death to Facism) and then linking to the scanned pdfs. New historical games take longer, there is usually 20+ pages of new material to sift through. Q&A will get added back in some day, I have just been too busy with paid work to decide on how I want to link it in effectively, but as retirement gets closer, I know my available time will soon expand .
I can see why people who don't have the time would like to have an electronic version available to purchase. I didn't want to wait for the official electronic version, which was talked about over 20 years ago. I will not pay for an electronic version, since I already have one that does everything I want it to do, as well as the fact I will buy a published version of any product I am interested in anyway, and I can (and do) add anything to my eASLRB that I want to add to it, fully linked and integrated, no matter who published the material. There is no doubt in my mind that, for me, an official eASLRB would be a step back, if only due to all the TPP material that is linked in, along with all the Historical ASL material. I would think that any official eASLRB would be geared towards newer players and it has functions to help them learn and understand the rules easier.