Quote:
Originally Posted by DuckieTigger
I don't like the special snowflake books that insist it is fun to mess with the style of the body text. Please leave it at the default. Chapter headings, section breaks, and such? Sure get creative and mix it up. For full body text all you do is aggravate those that just want to read.
|
Obviously this is a rather heated topic.
To me, the best solution is to let the user choose whether to use the publisher defaults or not, the way iBooks does. Adding or removing hyphenation by downloading different file formats and/or modifying them isn't really very user-friendly. That's why I said Amazon was being a dictator on the typography.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jhowell
To be precise, in the case I was describing Amazon delivers a set of JSON files that have the same format as the contents of an AZK file. I hadn't made the connection before, but it does look like the contents of an AZK file are the same type of JSON files that the cloud reader app uses. I guess it was easier for Amazon to put their cloud reader web app into the Kindle for iOS app than to implement full KF8 support there. That could be the explanation for the existence of AZK.
(That still leaves of question of why KFX was created. I doubt that it was done just to introduce some typographic enhancements.)
|
Thanks, I think we're on the same page here on AZK, even if we're coming from slightly different angles
I think the easiest answer to "why KFX" is probably the opacity. If the whole file is encrypted in AES/CBC,
regardless of whether the file is DRM'd or not...I mean, it's pretty obvious. They don't want anyone looking at the internals. But the "enhanced typography" certainly provides a good cover.
I mean, I could be wrong, for sure. If Amazon starts passing out the kfxgen utility so creators can properly proof their books, then I was wrong.
---
Now, general question: I know that MobileRead rules prohibit discussion of removal of DRM--what about the removal of KFX obfuscation (or encryption, if you want to call it that)? What are the moral and legal implications there?
I didn't think there was an issue, but jhowell's
kfxmeta.py script has this clause:
Quote:
|
This program does NOT extract actual book content. It does not deal with DRM or encryption. Use of this tool to aid in content extraction or DRM removal is not sanctioned!
|
So I thought I'd ask.