Quote:
Originally Posted by JimmyG
Elsewhere I mentioned that I wrote my own program to finish the book I was working on when I gave up on Sigil. I am 95% of the way through the final proofread. When I get it done I will have to decide if I want to make it general purpose, i.e., start a new book, open an existing book, etc. Now, it has NO error checking. And if I rewrite it, it will have NO error checking.
It has a viewer to view a file. It displays just what it gets; if something's wrong, it's usually fairly obvious where it is. Every now and then I run it through the idpf validator and fix any errors that pop up.
I'm not as hung up on errors as Sigil seems to be. I'm trying to put a book together. I'm concerned with typos, spelling, grammar, and "could that be written better?" When I get it all put together, I run it thru the validator until I've swatted all the bugs. Then I run thru a final proofread and correct content and style errors, then back to the validator. If there are any errors, I'm going to find them somewhere along the line.
|
Honestly, you are likely better off with Scrivener. That's a word-processing and writing/authoring program.
Sigil isn't. I really wish that when Valloric had launched this program, he'd left the whole "WYSIWYG" text OFF the description(s) of the program, because it seems to constantly cause this type of conflation.
I think you'd be better off simply using something like Scrivener, and when you're done authoring the book, THEN output your book in ePUB from that, validate it, and if you have issues, THEN use Sigil. Using Sigil for drafting/redrafting/editing is, to my way of thinking, the wrong tool for the wrong job. Or use Jutoh; another program that is far more "writer-friendly" in terms of what it does than is Sigil. As user_none said, somewhere in time, Sigil is simply an XHTML/CSS editing tool for those users already familiar with both--it's not an authoring tool,
per se.
Hope that helps.
Hitch