Proofreading pass: fix typos, grammar, and markup errors across the book

[DanilSko]

Summary

Full proofreading pass over the book (all 46 content files: every Markdown chapter + all 5 notebooks, per _toc.yml). 36 commits, one per changed file — see individual commit messages for exact details per file.

Clear typos (spelling, grammar/agreement, copy-paste debris)

Misspellings (Barrierarmut, hevorgehoben ×2, automatisert, Elememte/Elemete, Noteboos ×2, compuation ×2, Fehlextr aktionen, Bezirkamts, Verbundpartern, literaturwissenschafliche, and more), grammar/agreement fixes (subject-verb, adjective endings, dative case), and copy-paste artifacts (a duplicated word, a duplicated trailing phrase, a broken </a> tag, 9× invalid </br> tags fixed to <br>, leftover list numbering, stray double-spaces).

Consistency / judgment calls (fixed, called out here as agreed)

• des Lands Berlin → des Landes Berlin-style idiom fixes, outdated ß-orthography (Meßvorgang/Meßoperationen → Messvorgang/Messoperationen, 4 occurrences across 3 files)
• Web-Scraping/Web Scraping/Webscraping spelling aligned to the hyphenated form (7 occurrences)
• ORCID alt-text and gender-notation (Autor*innen→Autor:innen) aligned within epilog/
• corpus-collection_metadata.md: DC.identifier aligned to the number already present in its own DC.source URL in the same record
• html-intro_structural-analysis.ipynb: a markdown cell referenced a variable (text_path) that doesn't exist in the notebook's code — corrected to the actual variable (path_to_html_doc)
• corpus-analysis_visualization.ipynb: a stale GitHub link (dh-network/quadriga) corrected to this repo, matching the same instructional template used correctly elsewhere in the book
• corpus-analysis_assessment.md: 4 dative-case instances of "Indexe" → "Indexen" (the ~10 other, grammatically-correct instances were left untouched)
• A single-backtick code fence that wouldn't render as a code block, fixed to triple-backtick, matching the adjacent examples in the same file

Explicitly NOT touched here — tracked separately

A cluster of content-correctness questions in the Korpusanalyse (readability-index) chapter — worked-example arithmetic that doesn't add up, an interpretation-scale mismatch between the chapter and its own notebook/quiz, a couple of factually-questionable claims in quiz feedback, and a probably-orphaned instructional paragraph in one notebook. These need an author decision about what the "correct" value/explanation should be, not a mechanical fix — written up in a companion issue.

Verification

• Every fix's exact source string was individually grep/JSON-verified against the actual files before editing (not just trusted from the read-only proofreading pass).
• All 5 touched .ipynb files reload as valid JSON; all 6 .md files with embedded {code-cell} Python blocks re-parse cleanly with ast.parse.
• Re-swept the whole repo afterward for every original wrong string — all gone (the only remaining hits were confirmed out-of-scope: a duplicate untouched file not in _toc.yml, a grammatically-correct plural substring false-positive, and raw scraped data/ files which are gitignored, not book content, and must never be edited).