Quote:
Originally Posted by Elfwreck
The issue isn't, "can ePub look as good as optimized-for-your-screensize PDFs?" They cannot; no question there.
The issue is, "which will publishers be willing to spend money to produce: Optimized PDFs, or reflowable formats?" We have the answer to that one.
Name a company that sells PDFs sized for 6" screens.
The pro-ePub crowd aren't comparing the relative, possible merits of PDFs to ePubs; we're comparing the PDFs we can buy now, and expect to be able to buy in the next few years, to the ePubs we can buy now, and expect to be able to buy in the next few years.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ahi
I find the utter willful deafness (blindness?) of people in this thread incomprehensible.
|
And
I find that both (?all?) sides in this discussion are showing an utter willful deafness to the
quite legitimate preferences and desires of the other posters!
You people value different things, darn it!
What Elfwreck wrote in his/her last paragraph above seems to express the position of (most of) the pro-ePub crowd pretty well. Ahi has done a fine job of showing that
really good typography is just plain missing from today's ePub renderers. And both positions are reasonable and legitimate.
I wish that Ahi and the "ePub is hopeless" crowd would stop making comments like the one I quoted above. Even the folks like me who half agree with him about typography are alienated by such.
I also wish that the "ePub is the only way forward" crowd would recognize and admit that full-auto layout is a long, long way from reaching the level of the best human-optimized typography. And that full-auto layout may
never reach the level of the best human-optimized typography.
All that said...
OF COURSE we all would prefer better typography to lousier typography (assuming no difference in the price of the book, that is). And there's really no reason why an ePub renderer needs to do worse than latex/TeX does for automatic (
e.g. no hand-tweaking) layout. The renderers I've seen to date do much worse than that, which really sucks. I'm also sure that there's plenty more room for improvement in auto-layout once the ePub renderers catch up with TeX.
As for my particular bias, well, here goes:
For reading fiction using different font sizes depending on lighting and how tired I am, I value reflow over fine typography. I also read on 5 different-sized screens at different times, which provides a further bias towards reflow. But for my very favorite books, I want a beautiful hard-cover edition that meets all standards for archival longevity, with the finest typography available. And I'm prepared to pay fairly serious $$ to get that, too. Beyond that, there're plenty of in-between cases as well.
I wish you folks would all lighten up a whole bunch.
Xenophon
(wearing his online-curmudgeon hat today)