Sigil 0.4.1 Released

[user_none]

Originally Posted by st_albert

OK, here's a zip file that contains (1) valleytest.epub, with content.opf as written by InDesign 4.0 epub export; (2) content.opf.034, content.opf after opening and save-as in Sigil-0.3.4; and (3) content.opf.041 after opening, fixing date metadata, and save-as in Sigil-0.4.1

The epub from indesign contains one error per FlightCrew, namely a malformed date. This is a known bug in ID4. Sigil 034 fixes this in passing, silently. Sigil 041 does not. (Not that it should, necessarily.)

Fixed for 0.4.2.

[charleski]

Originally Posted by st_albert

But there's a difference between 0.3.4 and 0.4 in that 0.3.4 will add the xml namespace references for opf and dc to the <metadata> tag if they aren't already there. Thus,

<metadata>

becomes

<metadata xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:opf="http://www.idpf.org/2007/opf">

version 0.4.0+ does not do this.

It does if you're creating a new ePub and importing the html.

When editing ePubs, though, the 0.4 behaviour was to try to avoid changing the opf unless it needs to, because that's what people asked for. When you add elements that require a particular prefix, it adds the prefix where it's needed. This is really more of an issue with assumptions made in the workflow, but I see John has changed it back to the old method.

[Jabby]

Originally Posted by user_none

Now, there is a difference between poor and unreadable. I'm okay with poor (as I said that's intentional) but if people are having trouble distinguishing the numbers, that's a different story.

Sitting at my normal distance from the screen and without the aid of a magnifying glass I am unable to distinguish the numbers.

Maybe, in the future, bionic eyes will be available to replace those that are worn out. But so far I'm slap out o'luck.

Regards - John

P.S. What does a gold star in front of a bug/enhancement number mean. Enhancement number 637 for instance. I am a huge proponent of this one.

[charleski]

Originally Posted by Jabby

P.S. What does a gold star in front of a bug/enhancement number mean. Enhancement number 637 for instance. I am a huge proponent of this one.

It means you'll be informed about any comments or changes in status for this issue.

So far we've just been concentrating on fixing all the bugs and major omissions that were left over in 0.4.0. New features will be coming in 0.5.

[adv_dp_fan]

I am having an issue with the "Fix" dialog that pops up in code view. It pops up and I click "fix manually" and I'm dropped back into code view that the point of the error BUT, all of the edits I made to the page are lost. I am having to go back and remake each of them each time which is driving me nuts. If I get one thing wrong I have to redo the whole page and take a chance I missed something else again.

EDIT: Which is a pain as I was working on a page, an IM came in stealing focus which popped up the dialog. I hate Window's focus stealing behavior, it is a pain for multitasking.

[user_none]

Originally Posted by adv_dp_fan

I am having an issue with the "Fix" dialog that pops up in code view. It pops up and I click "fix manually" and I'm dropped back into code view that the point of the error BUT, all of the edits I made to the page are lost. I am having to go back and remake each of them each time which is driving me nuts. If I get one thing wrong I have to redo the whole page and take a chance I missed something else again.

There was a bug with 0.4.0 with this happening. I fixed it in 0.4.1 and I haven't been able to recreate the issue. Can you give some detail on what your doing prior to the dialog?

[user_none]

Originally Posted by Jabby

Sitting at my normal distance from the screen and without the aid of a magnifying glass I am unable to distinguish the numbers.

I'll make them a bit darker for 0.4.2.

[adv_dp_fan]

Originally Posted by user_none

There was a bug with 0.4.0 with this happening. I fixed it in 0.4.1 and I haven't been able to recreate the issue. Can you give some detail on what your doing prior to the dialog?

Hmm, well I was combining several <p>s into one with <br/> between them and removing <span>s in the different <p>s. Had changed several and forgot to remove a </span> in one and when I told it "fix manually", it dropped me back with all of them reverted to before I edited any of it.

I will see if I can work up a simple test case that repeats it.

[charleski]

Originally Posted by adv_dp_fan

I will see if I can work up a simple test case that repeats it.

Actually you mentioned the important event in your earlier postscript - you had an IM window that stole focus. I think the focus-handling needs to be rewritten to work differently.

[Edit] fixed for 0.4.2

[Toxaris]

Originally Posted by adv_dp_fan

Hmm, well I was combining several <p>s into one with <br/> between them and removing <span>s in the different <p>s.

That explains it... I didn't know Sigil was smart enough to change the <br /> back to paragraphs...

[st_albert]

Originally Posted by charleski

It does if you're creating a new ePub and importing the html.

When editing ePubs, though, the 0.4 behaviour was to try to avoid changing the opf unless it needs to, because that's what people asked for. When you add elements that require a particular prefix, it adds the prefix where it's needed. This is really more of an issue with assumptions made in the workflow, but I see John has changed it back to the old method.

I suspected that might be the case, and I have a great deal of sympathy for that approach (i.e. no -- or few -- silent modifications without warning). In my case, since I'm in there editing the opf already, I wouldn't be unhappy with either approach. Once I figured out what was going on, that is.

That said, I don't see any harm in making sure the xmlns references are there, even if possibly unneeded; and putting them in the <metadata> tag seems to me to be the most reasonable place in general.

In any event, thank you and John for your hard work on Sigil!

[Rand Brittain]

Yes, I'm very pleased by all this pointing out bugs and then having them stop happening. It says good things about the future of Sigil.

[tombarys]

Originally Posted by user_none

0.4.1 is now available. See this for the full release announcement.

The Sigil page on google code does not work.
Help, please!

[cuthbert19]

Originally Posted by tombarys

The Sigil page on google code does not work.
Help, please!

It works perfectly well as of now (15 minutes after your post).

[mrmikel]

A new issue seems to have cropped up in 0.4.1. If you highlight text then indent right, text which is separated by </br> becomes double spaced. If you indent left again, all the text is single spaced except the last line which stays double spaced and sometimes the selection includes text that wasn't selected in the first place.

This seems to happen when you first open a document, later, it seems to not happen. This is relation to a few lines of poetry in the middle of an otherwise prose document.

Aught unsavoury or unclean
Hath my insect never seen
But violets and bilberry bells
Maple sap and daffodils


Grass with green flag half-mast high;
Succory to match the sky,
Columbine with horn of honey
Scented fern and acrimony


Clover, catchfly, adder's tongue
And brier-roses dwelt among,
All besides was unknown waste
All was picture as he passed.
Wiser far than human seer
Yellow-breeched philosopher.