Quote:
Originally Posted by fjtorres
A good start.
A better one would be to ditch all the fixed layout stuff along with the interactivity into a separate format for textbooks and academic papers.
That way, people who actually *need* those features in their documents can get a (pricier) reader that can do them (Probably a PC with a new reading app.) instead of trying to squeeze them out of a $99 gadget.
Trying to create a super format requires a super reader at a time when the bulk of the ebook money is still in narrative text. There is no economic incentive for the walled-garden vendors to take on the expense and complexity of the full (or even near-full) spec. No yet.
So far, trying to use the consumer side of the industry to ramp up the academic side is not working; it didn't work when Amazon did the DX, and it hasn't worked for the other high-feature readers like Plastic Logic, Ectaco, etc. For now the market seems to prefer its readers small and cheap and its ebooks simple and cheaper still.  |
Epub 3 has been two years in the making and is (IMO) too large a leap from Epub 2. In the article:
Quote:
|
Apple has done what they wanted/needed to do to achieve the functionality they want for iBooks and iBooks Author on the iPad. Much of what Kobo has done with fixed layout is based on iBooks, but they are not Apple so they cannot create the same files. B&N has their own approach to fixed layout and supports different things. This is why Kaplansky said there will never be “one EPUB file to rule them all.” If you are creating fixed-layout EPUBs, you will probably need to create different files for each retailer.
|
Is that what Epub not2/not3 is destined to become...a fragmented "standard" specific to each major vendor?