How about the 'Sounds of Star Wars' book. The point of the book is the sounds, so yes it would be nice if the pictures were from the same time period, but they're not, even though the book is done chronologically.
Another example the 'Creating the World of Star Wars 365 Days' by John Knoll (publication 2005). Again the book is presented chronologically, but the screen images are from the 2004 dvds, and although haven't checked for descriptions which reference 70s tech, the 2004 colors would be the issue here. Would these be included in this, or do you want to maintain SE changes only?
Would you add in a measurement of degree of revisionism to this list, or let the reader decide?
If yes, here's some ideas of categories/terminology:
Mild Revisionism - example: Clerical Errors, Poor Research by non Lucasfilm employee
Medium Revisionism - example: outside General Lucasfilm articles, newspaper, tv reports
Severe Revisionism - example: Lucasfilm publication but not primary focus of publication, outside specific Lucasfilm Special Effects articles, newspaper, tv reports, History books
Outright Revisionism - reserved for Lucasfilm publications only