View Single Post
Old 03-15-2016, 03:02 PM   #16
bookman156
Addict
bookman156 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.bookman156 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.bookman156 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.bookman156 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.bookman156 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.bookman156 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.bookman156 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.bookman156 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.bookman156 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.bookman156 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.bookman156 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Posts: 368
Karma: 1000000
Join Date: Mar 2016
Device: none
Quote:
Originally Posted by DiapDealer View Post
You'll notice that no one in this thread has claimed that EPUB2 "is based on" CSS 2.1. Rather that; where a single specification must be chosen for the inexact validation of CSS in an EPUB2, CSS 2.1 was the lesser of two evils.
No, it was on the other thread that it was suggested that EPUB 2 is closer to CSS 2.1:

https://www.mobileread.com/forums/sho...d.php?t=206894

It seems to me that the choice of lowest common denominator shouldn't have been between CSS 2.1 and CSS 3 but rather between CSS 2.1 and 2.0, with the latter being preferred. But I gather this has already been discussed. Someone on that thread suggested 2.0 should be the default rather than 2.1. Maybe that was right. But having the ability to choose what version of CSS to validate against, rather than having it chosen by what kind of EPUB one is working on, seems best for Sigil.

Last edited by bookman156; 03-15-2016 at 03:08 PM.
bookman156 is offline   Reply With Quote