Quote:
Originally Posted by Jellby
Right. My point was that they didn't choose the format because they thought it was better than ePUB. When ePUB "appeared", they had already made their choice.
|
Okay.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jellby
But the two books are never identical (underline is mine). The ePUB version would, for instance, allow user stylesheets. As for "needlessly complex", it depends on what one determines is "needed"; a series of screen snapshots could probably be made to display faster (with the appropriate optimizations), and it would look exactly the same as the book from which the snapshots are taken. Of course, one could argue that the Mobi format is enough and everything further is unneeded, but others won't agree.
|
What I meant was, if you take the same book, with the same content (i.e., the two texts are identical word for word, and font choice for font choice) and the MOBI book loads faster than the ePub book, doesn't that mean that the MOBI book is faster, and that the other things in the ePub book (e.g., the stylesheet) are just weighing it down? If you can achieve the same book with less baggage, why wouldn't you? (Of course, it's arguable that a text with XML formatting without stylesheets is
more complex than one with a stylesheet, but for the sake of argument, I'll accept the proposition that the MOBI format is simpler.)