Tom,
If they have to be mutually exclusive than I vote for "A" - the large, heavy and pretty and hardest to carry around, push the envelope of your previous limits on what size it could be.
I'll try not to be a luddite preaching, but "The Book," Tom..."The Book is the thing." Forget the 3-D joys of breezing through pages, the physical interactions, the appearance on a table or shelf in ones environment...It's your mind in my hand. Your thoughts and artistic choices communicated tangibly...
Enough proselytizing, but given this is my view, it naturally directs me to say that if it be a Book, let it be a grand, central, special Book...a precious book, with all the attempts at finery and grandeur befitting such a compendium. I mean, didn't you have something grand, or grandly informative, in mind when you first thought to do this? It's a chore of choices now, but think back with what compelled you to make such a gathering and exposition?
And if they are not mutually exclusive, then I still vote for "A" but of course seconded with E - an electronic edition, regionalized or not. i guarantee that if both were available, the people who will buy "A" at the commensurate expense with a grand thing, will likely buy "E" too.
As strongly as I can, I disagree respectfully with Mark R. (and anyone else who mentioned a similar facet) that you can "revise" as your opinion evolves, or that electronic fluency with other mediums - makes this better. If "A," "B" and/or "C" are not in place, these are deleterious, imo, things
On both fronts, I say: "Don't make your precious, valuable work disposable"
1. I have heard literally dozens of writers...fiction, history, journalists, who in 2012 type with a typewriter, because of the delete/backspace key on the modern Word Processor...if it erased, its gone. For ill or for worse, your work will be viewed by future generations and your evolving opinion stands to be as much a part of this topic's historical record as what your content is. The future generations, imo, will find it valuable to know that in 1996, you thought this and had this to say about this or that course and in 2013, you had these different comments. The meat of your history is doubtless your work as a GCA, but you will not be around to contribute to the discussions of distant future years, when you would probably most like to be. This is precisely what is often argued about when nuanced discussions about nuanced topics come up now in this and other "historical" venues...Wilson wouldn't have done that...Tillinghast ragged on that course, but why did he imitate 4 of its holes...Ross designed Siwanoy but Wynton should get an undercard billing somewhere..." etc. So, if there's even a chance of revising the truth of what was said and what occurred, without a central Gospel reference edition...truth suffers for those who wish to explore the topic...
2. Fluency with other mediums, portability..other electronic highlights. Perhaps I have more of an inflated opinion of what you've assembled and worked at than you do. Golf after all is a silliness and there's what? 5000 people in a world of seven billion to whom this means a great deal? Sure enough but my point is, if you have worked at it, and are rightfully proud of it and the 5000 people care about it, why would you make it a disposable thing, right in the slipstream of whatever consumption churn goes on for the other 6,999,995,000 people on the planet in all their expressive products. iIm not saying disposable in the sense that you can lose it or break it or computers will be magnetically pulsed clean by catastrophe...I mean disposable in the sense of "ubiquitous," "taken for granted", if everyone who wants it can get it in a click, on any germane forum, link to online magazine, etc...where's the excitement, where's the specialness, where's the quest...once the itch is scratched, the gratification so quick and immediate...how quickly consumed and ignored by its user? I would never do that with Scotland's gift; Golf...I make sure I can see that book at all times and that it is at hand and I can turn to page whatever at the drop of a hat when i'm in the GCAzone...zone.
But that's all if they're mutually exclusive...
To Recap:
"A" if one and only one type
"A," facilitated and backed up by "E" if the publishign situation is fluid enough.
***eliminated, for me
B doesn't go as far as A and so is out
C and D, sound like great commercial ideas for you and your cohort, but only so long as there is a central "biblical unit" from which the regional apostles come....again "A"
E alone is no choice at all for me, for reasons stated above.
cheers
vk