Quote:
Originally Posted by JSWolf
Are these the same idiots that put a link to the internal ToC in the NCX and also put in the internal ToC?
|
Actually, Wolfie:
Although I know that this is your personal pet peeve, I have to tell you that now that Amazon accepts ePUB as source material, you will be seeing more and more of it. We provide conversion for publishers and aggregators, and they neither like nor want dual books; they want a single ePUB that meets both ePUB and MOBI standards. In order to provide an ePUB that meets MOBI standards when converted, you have to have an HTML TOC linked via the Guide; and as it is in its own file, like any other section, we do put the TOC in the NCX, ourselves.
Moreover--before you start--I'd note that the 2.01 OPF Spec lists a TOC entry, and that's NOT for the NCX, as we all know. It's for an internal, HTML TOC. Clearly, the existence of an HTML TOC is not merely contemplated by spec but supported. AND, on top of all that, the ePUB3.0 working document states:
Quote:
|
Every EPUB Publication defines at least one such logical ordering of all its top-level content (the spine [Publications30]), as well as a declarative table of contents (the EPUB Navigation Document [ContentDocs30]). Publications make these data structures available in a machine-readable way external to the content, simplifying their discovery and use. (bold and red emphasis added)
|
So it's clear, from the text, that ePUB isn't moving away from a declarative TOC, but rather, toward it (and let's not forget that 3.0 also says we're moving away from the NCX and toward the NavDocument). The "Navigation Document," if you've read that spec, is patently what we refer to today as an HTML TOC.
So you can call them--or me, for that matter--"idiots" all you want, but while you may have the luxury of making ePUBs precisely as you like them,
for your own use, not everyone has that privilege. My company has to make ePUBs that meet the spec, and work on platforms like Apple (
which uses the HTML TOC--NOT the ncx, at all, mind you). I have to make books for people that, quite reasonably, want ONE book that they can upload everywhere. So do the Indians, I'd imagine. I personally prefer only using the NCX--but my iPad doesn't support that. My Nook does. My Kindle Fire doesn't, but is moving toward it, and my K2 doesn't at all, obviously. It's clear from the 3.0 Working Group that we are moving TO a more-functional, defined "HTML TOC" that works somewhat like an NCX--in other words, is both human- and machine-readable, which is the current "glitch" in the proceedings.
I mean, really--not to sound
ever-so-slightly-exasperated, but why don't you go volunteer with the IDPF working groups and take it up WITH THEM? Everyone here knows all too well how you feel about HTML TOCs, and quite honestly, it's a bit RABID for something so minor. For the love of heaven, if you don't LIKE an HTML TOC, don't USE IT.
In the interim, while you go sort them out and put them in their places, if you would, please, I will just shlub along here and do what my clients pay me to do.
WITH the satanic HTML TOC's, if that's what they want.
Affectionately,
really,
Hitch