Quote:
Originally Posted by KevinH
Yes, but I think still valid so this may be a bug in Sigil's opf parser.
In that opf they define a new namespace prefix ns0 that they assign for the default opf namespace and then therefore have to use it everywhere. Certainly not the most concise representation and notation but not incorrect xml as far as I can see.
This confuses the internal Sigil opf parser so I will have to fix that.
|
Thank you.
I will give your solution a try immediately.