Quote:
Originally Posted by DaleDe
I agree, a sigil.css is a good solution. The code needs to ensure the reuse of an entry instead of creating a new one. I had one file that was edited in several sessions and even in the on page CSS I found that the same exact CSS entry would be stored under several different Sigil CSS classes.
Dale
|
Hmmmm. I'm thinking about this. Generally, we don't encounter this issue often, as we import CSS with our html files, and thus don't have the infamous Tidying Infernal CSS styles showing up, but...
@DaleDe, thinking about that idea, the Sigil.css issue, what would happen, for example, thinking through the mechanics, if someone had two stylesheets? (We often do, as we build Kindle8-compatible ePUBs for our publisher clients, which they upload via eBookbase [essentially, although not actually] rather than the KDP [and thus, the ePUB must convert perfectly to K8 MasterMobi], and our experience is that 2 stylesheets, for the K7 & 8, work best.) Would the Sigil.css file simply be a third Stylesheet--or, for that matter, without overthinking it, would it be a second for those books that already have them?
I mean, we've all imported books with existing stylesheets, or used an xhtml file that was in Book A (like, an "About this Author" page) in Book B and imported the stylesheet along with it, so my initial thoughts are that as long as the Sigil.css didn't supplant the existing, I'd think that might be a usable compromise solution. Personally, I think it's a little overhyped as a problem, simply being an internal ss, which is fairly easy to find/fix, BUT, if people using BV are having issues, then maybe it
does need some sort of compromise.
My $.02, FWIW.
Hitch