Quote:
Originally Posted by netseeker
I disagree and think it's good that they didn't include any statement about DRM in their specifications. But i get your point and it's not neccessary that we share the same opinion.
|
Agreed
Quote:
Originally Posted by netseeker
You are right - but is it really the fault of the format? I don't think so. It seems that i've more technical reasons (point of view of a software developer) to criticize the ePub-specification.
|
Well as a SW developer for many years I've seen many proposed standards come and go. The best standards are those that are rigorous enough to allow consistency yet flexible enough for developers/hardware vendors to implement a cost effective solution.
ePUB today is too flexibility. SONY's file limitation should not have happened. The spec should have provided for these memory constrained devices or excluded them form supporting ePUB.
Quote:
Originally Posted by netseeker
Despite that i think developers could implement a good and standard conforming implementation for ePub-reading software even if there are some features outlined in the specification which can be very hard to implement on mobile devices. Adobes (+Sonys) implementation isn't as good as it could/should be and i don't know any other useable implementation at the moment. We just need more ePub-reading software. LIT/Mobi had the same problems at the beginning - initially there weren't any other reading software available than those from Mobipocket (mobi) and Microsoft (lit).
|
Right and that is what scares me. With MOBI/LIT one company had complete control of the clients developed, to ensure MOBI/LIT worked across whatever device was developed.
ePUB does not benefit from this and with a very loosely defined standard I see a bumpy road for ePUB.
I really want ePUB to succeed but fear without a conforming ePUB standard there will be many solutions of ePUB that will not work different devices.