Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Sorotokin
Hmm, I'd call it "sloppy", not "liberal". Why do you think it's a good idea?
|
Because it places a lot of unneccessary burden on content creators for no real benefit. Things like requiring zip file headers be exact or that namespaces be explicitly declared are going a little beyond the level of neccessary strictness.
Quote:
Yes, we either need a namespace or XHTML DTD (OPS DTD would work as well).
XHTML spec as well, I think.
|
Yeah but surely if DE encounters an HTML file without a namespace declaration it can assume that it is XHTML or HTML 4.01 (particularly since if I just insert a bogus namespace declaration claiming the file is XHTML (even though it is not) DE is perfetly happy (as it should be).
Quote:
|
Unfortunately, my experience is that creation tools will make use of any sloppiness that they can get away with. And I don't think there are any disagreements that content slopiness is bad for everyone.
|
Ensuring correctness of files should be the job of validators like epubcheck, not viewers.
Quote:
|
By all means, roll your own! I cannot give you any hints on what is planned when (there is a strict company-wide policy on public disclosures of that kind).
|
Sigh, I was hoping I wouldn't have to bother, but, I guess since once I do this, the viewer will automatically work for LIT and MOBI files as well, makes it worthwhile. In any case DE is a little too heavyweight for a simple viewer app.