Differences in files between vendors

ATimson · 06-15-2011, 10:52 PM

Normally, I would have expected that each vendor would be given the same ePub file, and the same file would come out the other end. But apparently that isn't so. Comparing a free book (Star Wars: Lost Tribe of the Sith #1: Precipice) from three vendors - Kobo, Sony, and B&N - reveals some interesting differences:

B&N has non-ASCII characters as numbered entity references, Kobo/Sony uses their Unicode version (in UTF-8).
Kobo/Sony margins and indents are specified in em, B&N uses px (at a 15px/em conversion factor).
Some classes (relating to a glossary, that's not actually used in the book!) are fully-justified in B&N's version and left-justified in the Kobo and Sony files.
B&N drops a "body { text-align: justify }" in at the end... in a different indent style from the rest of the code, strongly implying that it didn't come from the publisher. (Related to the justification change above?)
Sony strips out custom fonts and references to the ADE page-template (though the files are still there!) and adds their own TOC HTML at the front.

It's possible that these are different source files from Random House, but they put the version number on the copyright page and have been - in my past experience w/bugged files that were fixed - pretty good about updating that.

So in the end, it looks like Kobo is the most "accurate" of those three vendors, which is leading me to consider switching to them. (Then again, fixing publishers not justifying their books is nice, and em margins rarely make sense anyways...

)

My first and obvious question is, why the hell are the vendors mucking around with the books? Also, has anybody else done any cross-vendor comparisons regarding "fidelity"?

HarryT · 06-18-2011, 02:43 AM

Having margins specified in ems isn't a terribly good idea. You don't generally want the size of the margins to increase when you increase the text size.

ATimson · 06-18-2011, 08:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HarryT

Having margins specified in ems isn't a terribly good idea. You don't generally want the size of the margins to increase when you increase the text size.

I agree, but I'd rather make that change myself than to just accept the vendor's word on it. (And that's also the only changes I found in this one example - hardly exhaustive!)

If the vendor is already deciding they know better than the publisher about formatting, how long until they decide they know better about content too?

JSWolf · 06-21-2011, 09:46 PM

Try this....

I've bought an ePub from B&N and it was different then the sample downloaded from B&N.

ATimson · 06-21-2011, 11:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JSWolf

Try this....

I've bought an ePub from B&N and it was different then the sample downloaded from B&N.

Great, as if I didn't have enough problems with this methodology.

JSWolf · 06-22-2011, 05:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ATimson

Great, as if I didn't have enough problems with this methodology.

Well, at least they aren't S&S Star Trek ePubs.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
iPad Welcomed By e-reader Vendors	Kris777	News	9	01-31-2010 02:37 AM
Retailing Trend Not for E-Book Reader Vendors?	Boston	News	3	12-02-2009 12:12 AM
A good place to check out potential online vendors	brecklundin	Deals and Resources (No Self-Promotion or Affiliate Links)	0	05-28-2009 05:06 AM
Who's done more than anyone to get the Sony Reader accepted by e-book vendors?	NatCh	Sony Reader	13	05-01-2008 11:55 PM
Vendors have too many rights	Bob Russell	Lounge	3	08-31-2005 12:45 PM

06-15-2011, 10:52 PM	#1
ATimson Evangelist Posts: 456 Karma: 1044878 Join Date: Apr 2009 Device: Kindle Paperwhite 4	Differences in files between vendors Normally, I would have expected that each vendor would be given the same ePub file, and the same file would come out the other end. But apparently that isn't so. Comparing a free book (Star Wars: Lost Tribe of the Sith #1: Precipice) from three vendors - Kobo, Sony, and B&N - reveals some interesting differences: B&N has non-ASCII characters as numbered entity references, Kobo/Sony uses their Unicode version (in UTF-8). Kobo/Sony margins and indents are specified in em, B&N uses px (at a 15px/em conversion factor). Some classes (relating to a glossary, that's not actually used in the book!) are fully-justified in B&N's version and left-justified in the Kobo and Sony files. B&N drops a "body { text-align: justify }" in at the end... in a different indent style from the rest of the code, strongly implying that it didn't come from the publisher. (Related to the justification change above?) Sony strips out custom fonts and references to the ADE page-template (though the files are still there!) and adds their own TOC HTML at the front. It's possible that these are different source files from Random House, but they put the version number on the copyright page and have been - in my past experience w/bugged files that were fixed - pretty good about updating that. So in the end, it looks like Kobo is the most "accurate" of those three vendors, which is leading me to consider switching to them. (Then again, fixing publishers not justifying their books is nice, and em margins rarely make sense anyways... ) My first and obvious question is, why the hell are the vendors mucking around with the books? Also, has anybody else done any cross-vendor comparisons regarding "fidelity"?

06-18-2011, 02:43 AM	#2
HarryT eBook Enthusiast Posts: 85,544 Karma: 93383099 Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: UK Device: Kindle Oasis 2, iPad Pro 10.5", iPhone 6	Having margins specified in ems isn't a terribly good idea. You don't generally want the size of the margins to increase when you increase the text size.

06-21-2011, 09:46 PM	#4
JSWolf Resident Curmudgeon Posts: 79,104 Karma: 144284184 Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Roslindale, Massachusetts Device: Kobo Libra 2, Kobo Aura H2O, PRS-650, PRS-T1, nook STR, PW3	Try this.... I've bought an ePub from B&N and it was different then the sample downloaded from B&N.

Advert

Advert