View Single Post
Old 11-08-2010, 01:13 PM   #348
=X=
Wizard
=X= ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.=X= ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.=X= ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.=X= ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.=X= ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.=X= ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.=X= ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.=X= ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.=X= ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.=X= ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.=X= ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
=X='s Avatar
 
Posts: 3,671
Karma: 12205348
Join Date: Mar 2008
Device: Galaxy S, Nook w/CM7
Hi @the_reader

I've tested that site and boy is it strict! I think of all the ePUBs I threw it's way only one generated no errors. All the others had some type of error, but all passed the test

I've even tried a very simple epub from Sigl and it too produced errors.

I've generated some HTML files by hand and even they failed their check.

I've even checked FeedBook ePUBs against this tool and they too failed.


In your example the error warnings are based on basic HTML syntax. If those attributes are being depreciated in the W3C spec then a waring should be generated not an error.


I guess in the end I'm not real confident with the web site you mentioned as a measure for a valid ePUB. Considering that all of the three tools I've mentioned above are used to generate ePUBs and not one reader has reported issues with their ePUBs, I'm inclined to believe the validating tool is the tool at fault.


=X=
=X= is offline   Reply With Quote