Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarmat89
Define why XHTML is 'simpler'. Simpler for book creator, reader creator or the end user?
|
Actually, I meant simpler in terms of the XHTML itself, hence my reference to the XHTML.
But now you mention it, I believe it is also simpler for the book creator, AND reader creator. The end user doesn't care one way or the other.
Quote:
|
Because implementing a fixed semantic standard gives more freedom in its implementation: the LCD device may, for example, render <em>s as inverted text, but <poem>s as left margin; if a physical/presentation format is used (HTML), it is impossible to do, as the formatting used is the same for both those elements.
|
What??? <em>s are HTML.
And ebook authors actively, aggressively want to control how their poems look.
People who write poems are bigger control freaks about their work than pretty much any other type of author.
Any new format that involves handing over the controls from their carefully specified presentation (regardless of how semantically chosen their CSS classes are) to some arbitrary committee-designed specification what a poem should look like...
They would have a cow. No, make that multiple, pregnant cows. Armies of them, in fact.
Keeping in mind that
as has been repeatedly mentioned in this thread, without you acknowledging those posts, ebook creators, including poets, have been and still are making semantically-defined ebooks that semantically define poems, letters, and many other things you haven't mentioned.
THEIR job is as easy as it is going to get (and the biggest problem is vendors and app-makers defecating on the EPUB standard, as I already mentioned above).
..
So yet again, I want to know -- what actual problems do you think need to be solved, and how do you intend to solve them?
If you feel there is a problem that no one else acknowledges is a problem, then step one of this thread should be trying to persuade us that it is indeed a problem.