Quote:
Originally Posted by elibrarian
The epubcheck validation tools does find more errors than Flight Crew, amongst others the itunes.plist-thingie (I think Sigil strips those out silently, so of course the built-in FlightCrew won't find it), and unusable links in the ncx.
But the point is, that the distributors and resellers - whether we like it or not - use the "official" epubcheck, not flightcrew.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Dillinquent
Epubcheck 3 is a more accurate validator for epub2 than whatever Sigil uses now. It is also what distributors will be using. Its no good telling Apple (for instance), when they reject your book, that their validation procedure is wrong and your epub is right because it passed the lame validation in Sigil.
|
Well, that all sounds spiffy, but it's not true that all distributors are using ePUBcheck3. Lulu, bygod, is still using 1.1. (Go ahead--try to submit an ePUB to Lulu that has dc:creator in it!) That's a big step away from 3. AFAIK, Apple is not using epubcheck 3, either; they were not as of December. If they've moved up to 3, that's news to me, and it's very recent. What they do have, and have had, is their own intake (transport) intake that checks for certain ePUB3 aspects. (And the ubiquitous dreaded itunes.plist file, as well).
So, to me, it's easier to do fundamental ePUBchecks with FC in Sigil, and then just drop the book on the most recent ePUBcheck, or, whatever ePUBcheck the specific distributor is using (like 1.1).