Quote:
Originally Posted by kiwidude
@JSWolf - correct, there is no option for general broken link checking. With recent releases of this plugin I have started tumbling down the slippery slope of all sorts of potential internal ePub content validation. My initial additions to this plugin were focused around things that calibre had responsibility for breaking (until recent fixes), like broken image links and broken NCX links. Having opened the door a crack with those, it is not unreasonable to consider other things eventually. Of course it is pretty much replicating some of FlightCrew validation, the difference being that this plugin would allow you the 50,000 foot view of which books have issues across your library, that you can then open in isolation to fix.
|
One thing I was thinking is if you have a general check for broken links, you could do away with all the separate link checking as this one would be a catchall for all links that are broken be they on the ncx or some internal link and it would also catch broken links from an internal ToC and image links that are broken. That would make link checking a one option only option that does it all.
As for the TOC/NCX naming, that was deliberate on my part for historical consistency but it is a fair point. The issue is that the very first option I had for QC was "Check TOC with < 3 entries". That was named that way so as to not bamboozle users with the term NCX, as I would suggest only a very small subset of users would understand what an NCX is. However you are 100% technically correct that all three of those options should state NCX. Perhaps a good compromise is "Check NCX TOC with < 3 entries", and then if we ever have checks related to an inline TOC we say "Check inline TOC ..."
Oh look, 3000 posts...[/QUOTE]
I agree to renaming the remaining ncx checks (if you implement my suggestion above) to NCX ToC.