Quote:
|
Anyway, I'm sorry to report that this method doesn't work in Nickel (the stock reader on eink Kobo devices), either with epubs or kepubs. Epubs on a Kobo use the Adobe page numbering system and kepubs use 1 screen=1 page.
|
Perhaps the new version I just released could help with that... if the standard Kobo reader fully implements the adobe features, then the page numbering can be manually defined via a page-map.xml.
In the newest release, which I have attached to this post, you can append the flag --page-map to the pagination command and it will add that file to the epub as well.
I've downloaded the desktop version of ADE, and it displays the new page count correctly.
I'd love to update the opening post with this as well but I don't see the edit button mentioned in the FAQ... some restriction for new users I assume?
Quote:
|
Maybe it's out of scope, but would you consider adding an alternate mode for word-based page approximation? My understanding is that ADE uses the number of bytes to approximate pages, so books with lots of formatting end up with more pages than books with sparse formatting. It would be a nice ADE alternative to be able to number the pages based on a user-specified number of characters/words/lines per page, instead, so you could have a consistent page metric across all your e-books.
|
I'd say it's slightly out of scope since as mentioned in the first post the tool assumes that you already know how many pages you want.
But maybe a feature like that, some sort of page count suggestion, could be added.
In order to find valid locations for page breaks the page approximator does indeed already create a "raw" representation of the book text without any xml/html markup and tags and it further limits the text to the content of tags that can reasonably be assumed to be visible to the reader (so the content of meta/head/style/script tags etc is omitted).
This could be a pretty good basis for what you want and the character/lines limit would be easily doable.
Words might get a bit more complicated, if only because they can be a bit of a pain to formally define and you might potentially end up with a more than a few hundred word difference depending on whether you count contractions as one or two words and other stuff like that.