Thread: Possible bug/weird behaviour in ACCESS. Strange scaling on covers
View Single Post
Old 11-26-2013, 09:38 PM   #6
davidfor
Grand Sorcerer
davidfor ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.davidfor ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.davidfor ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.davidfor ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.davidfor ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.davidfor ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.davidfor ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.davidfor ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.davidfor ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.davidfor ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.davidfor ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Posts: 24,905
Karma: 47303824
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Sydney, Australia
Device: Kobo:Touch,Glo, AuraH2O, GloHD,AuraONE, ClaraHD, Libra H2O; tolinoepos
Quote:
Originally Posted by arspr View Post
Unless I'm seriously wrong, as I said in the first post, all the images but "La reina sin espejo" have a height: 100% setting. That is a fit setting AFAIK, isn't it?



At least in my PC, Sigil 0.7.4 seems to have some trouble rendering images which I don't remember from previous versions but I don't feel like downgrading. (A bug in Sigil?) Nevertheless because of all the things that are happening with Sigil, I think that a more confident test is done through Calibre viewer. And I swear that they make a perfect fit in Calibre.

I'm telling a white lie here. They make a perfect fit EVEN in "La reina sin espejo" which actually doesn't have any kind of height setting. In my first post I supposed that in this situation the standard rendering was showing the image with its original size. Maybe the software can actually choose what to do in that case with no explicit setting?



I cannot follow you. Why do you say that ACCESS is doing the expected thing if it is not following an explicit height: 100% setting? As I post it's normally making a perfect width: 100% but then height is 118% (or whatever).
I think there are a couple of problems with the above. One is a mixture of standards. The epub standards are for HTML5. This allows IMG width in percent or pixels but height only in pixels. The height in percent as specified is probably being ignored.

The other problem is what does 100% mean? Full size or fill the containing element?
Quote:
Again I'm no expert so I am possibly wrong. But look how in your svg code (which is not an img tag but a combination of newer svg and image tags) you have both the size of the image in pixels AND a resizing through height and width 100% plus an aspect ratio preserving setting.

I mean, unless I'm seriously wrong the resizing of the image is always done through the 100% setting which my examples have.
If you go to the epub forum here and ask "How do I get my cover images to resize to screen size but maintain the aspect ratio?", you will get the code I posted. With a statement to change the sizes to match the image size. I have played with the IMG tag in the past and never gotten it perfect. With the SVG and IMAGE tags, it works perfectly

I would suggest you read up on the tags and their attributes. It's been a while since I did, but how it working made sense when I looked at it.
davidfor is offline   Reply With Quote