Ok... even with major improvements I could not see myself using this. This is why -- please do not take it personally: (1) the core functionality already exist

Ok... even with major improvements I could not see myself using this. This is why -- please do not take it personally: (1) the core functionality already exists in the form of the hyperlink. HTML lets you easily reference external materials as well as handle inline footnotes. It is relatively easy to port existing content to HTML and vice-versa and mix-and-match reference styles. And people can dive into subjects in as much depth as they want on existing sites (look at Wikipedia). There are WYSIWYG editors. And content is portable. So why switch? (2) if I care enough to write a book, I care about making it look good. The website does not look as good as a default blog, and the added functionality is intrusive and ugly. For one example, look at the way the down arrows occupy an entire vertical row, distorting the spacing of the text. The HTML design looks like it is using 1990s display defaults (no floats, no inlining), even though it is clearly more sophisticated once you check the source. (3) teachers and educators very rarely put effort into creating content for institutional educational when it doesn't play into a larger project or effort initiated or supported by a school/grant. This might be a controversial statement, but which school started Wikipedia? Which school started the Khan Academy? Look at the limited number of open source textbooks almost twenty years after the web began making inroads and you can see your market does not really exist. Teachers will experiment with mass market platforms (like blogs, twitter) which have social reverb and cachet. They don't get institutional support for writing open source stuff on the web so there is more focus on fulfilling individual classroom needs than writing more general textbooks. (4) compared to HTML, it's cognitively more difficult to have to always be thinking about what sort of stuff to leave out or minimize. Someone writing a textbook is already applying selection criteria. You are asking them to cognitively handle presentation-level data as well. This puts a higher bar on getting useful content even if someone starts writing. (5) the triangles are too big and are on the right-hand side. The default is smaller triangles to the left which point to the left when closed and point down when open. (6) "Bookvoid" is a problem. Even if someone out there hypothetically wants this, what keywords are going to bring them to your site and what metaphor will you use to explain what is happening? You don't have an organizing metaphor ("Wordpress for Teachers") that makes intuitive sense and helps your users figure out how to explain what you do to others. (7) You would probably get better adoption with something like "Wordpress for Teachers" which simplified the install process, targets a specific market that wants your services, and includes default functionality that makes sense for teachers, such as easily converting their posts into a book format for distribution across the platforms they will care about (Amazon, iOS, eBooks, etc.). Not that I would enter this business, but....