html or xhtml: does it matter?

[Gregg Bell]

I know the basics: xhtml is an extension of html and the tags neeed to be lower case and closed etc etc. But I'm a non-techie and I'm using Sigil and the 'Add Blank html file' in the Book Browser seems to sometimes create an html and sometimes an xhtml file. I'm adding a "Also By Gregg Bell" section after the "About the Author" in my ebooks and I've looked at some of the books that have been made in the past and some have AlsoByGreggBell.html and others AlsoByGreggBell.xhtml.

Does it matter which it is? (I'm really hoping it doesn't.) And if it needs to be either xhtml or html how do I manipulate Sigil to do that? Thanks.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by Gregg Bell

Does it matter which it is? (I'm really hoping it doesn't.) And if it needs to be either xhtml or html how do I manipulate Sigil to do that? Thanks.

It doesn't matter a whit, functionally. The file's extension does not determine how Sigil treats the content.

Sigil should (depending on the version of course) create a new, Blank HTML File with a .xhtml extension (ironic, I know). Splitting, merging, or importing existing files will retain the original extension (whatever it was). But your Sigil epub will work equally well with all .html extensions, all .xhtml extensions or any mixture of the two.

Many just find a nice, consistent file extension to be aesthetically ... soothing. I hardly ever notice the file extensions myself...

...until I DO notice them...

...and then I can't un-notice them...

...not until they once again fade into the comforting obscurity that conformity provides, anyway.

Bottom line is: if you don't mind ... Sigil doesn't either. It also doesn't mind if you DO mind.

[Gregg Bell]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

It doesn't matter a whit, functionally. The file's extension does not determine how Sigil treats the content.

Sigil should (depending on the version of course) create a new, Blank HTML File with a .xhtml extension (ironic, I know). Splitting, merging, or importing existing files will retain the original extension (whatever it was). But your Sigil epub will work equally well with all .html extensions, all .xhtml extensions or any mixture of the two.

Many just find a nice, consistent file extension to be aesthetically ... soothing. I hardly ever notice the file extensions myself...

...until I DO notice them...

...and then I can't un-notice them...

...not until they once again fade into the comforting obscurity that conformity provides, anyway.

Bottom line is: if you don't mind ... Sigil doesn't either. It also doesn't mind if you DO mind.

Thanks Diap. That's a big relief. Now I just have to make sure if I have links that they match up with the .html or .xhtml endings. What's weird though is I have several Sigil windows open right now and using the 'add blank html file' some of the windows create an html file and using the 'add blank html file' in other windows they create xhtml files.

I guess it really doesn't matter but I wonder why it's doing that.

Thanks man. I have a ton of work to do and your reply is really freeing me up.

[eschwartz]

The links should be automatically handled by Sigil. Or calibre's editor -- in fact, it has a very nice autocomplete fuzzy-matching thingy.

As far as the file extensions thing goes -- As DiapDealer said, it doesn't matter. The file needs to be valid xhtml (or else you know because Flightcrew or Epubcheck yells at you ) but it happily treats .html or .htm as .xhtml --although nitpicky perfectionists like myself seem to have congregated in this thread here: https://www.mobileread.com/forums/sho...d.php?t=257089

Totally optional, no one will ever know or care other than you... I wouldn't even bother if I were you.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by Gregg Bell

What's weird though is I have several Sigil windows open right now and using the 'add blank html file' some of the windows create an html file and using the 'add blank html file' in other windows they create xhtml files.

I guess it really doesn't matter but I wonder why it's doing that.

That really shouldn't be. I know older versions of Sigil created .html files, but at some point, it was changed to .xhtml. But it really shouldn't be doing both in the same version (regardless of how many instances are open). Perhaps that's one of the bugs fixed since 0.7.2.

[Gregg Bell]

Originally Posted by eschwartz

The links should be automatically handled by Sigil. Or calibre's editor -- in fact, it has a very nice autocomplete fuzzy-matching thingy.

As far as the file extensions thing goes -- As DiapDealer said, it doesn't matter. The file needs to be valid xhtml (or else you know because Flightcrew or Epubcheck yells at you ) but it happily treats .html or .htm as .xhtml --although nitpicky perfectionists like myself seem to have congregated in this thread here: https://www.mobileread.com/forums/sho...d.php?t=257089

Totally optional, no one will ever know or care other than you... I wouldn't even bother if I were you.

Thanks eschwartz. Yeah, it's good to know that Flightcrew and eEpubcheck will catch the mismatches. And yeah, I don't care in the least about the aesthetics of the guts. I just want to get this done right so it looks good to the reader.

P.S. Pretty funny thread.

[Gregg Bell]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

That really shouldn't be. I know older versions of Sigil created .html files, but at some point, it was changed to .xhtml. But it really shouldn't be doing both in the same version (regardless of how many instances are open). Perhaps that's one of the bugs fixed since 0.7.2.

Who knows. I double checked though. In the screenshot I can't create an xhtml file. (I was trying to for the "Also by Gregg Bell." It just creates an html file. But in blank Sigil it creates an xhtml file. Who knows.

[Toxaris]

Could it be that it will use the extension xhtml if it is a blank ePUB or all the files are xhtml and html if the majority of the files uses the html extension?

[Notjohn]

I write my books in WordStar 7d, last updated about 1991. It saves all files as CAPITALS.HTM and Sigil will dutifully open the file as CAPITALS.HTM and all future splits as Section0001.HTM etc with no apparent (not apparent to me, anyhow) change in functionality. I would be very distressed to discover that my books are somehow not as sophisticated as the other kids'.

[Gregg Bell]

Originally Posted by Toxaris

Could it be that it will use the extension xhtml if it is a blank ePUB or all the files are xhtml and html if the majority of the files uses the html extension?

You may be right, and if you're not, it's a very good theory.

[Gregg Bell]

Originally Posted by Notjohn

I write my books in WordStar 7d, last updated about 1991. It saves all files as CAPITALS.HTM and Sigil will dutifully open the file as CAPITALS.HTM and all future splits as Section0001.HTM etc with no apparent (not apparent to me, anyhow) change in functionality. I would be very distressed to discover that my books are somehow not as sophisticated as the other kids'.

Notjohn, I'm probably the least techie person in this forum but FWIW I remember reading about xhtml's stuff needing to be lower case. http://www.landofcode.com/xhtml-tuto...-and-xhtml.php

[PeterT]

Its only the TAGS need to be in lowercase; not the file names.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Gregg Bell

Thanks eschwartz. Yeah, it's good to know that Flightcrew and eEpubcheck will catch the mismatches. And yeah, I don't care in the least about the aesthetics of the guts. I just want to get this done right so it looks good to the reader.

P.S. Pretty funny thread.

Actually, you should care about the aesthetics of the guts. The cleaner it is, the simpler the code and the easier to find any mistakes. Also, messy code can turn off some people from buying any more of your eBooks. I don't buy from Smashwords all that much because the code is mostly a Word > ePub conversion and the code can be a real mess.

You want code that's clean so it's easier for you to deal with. Take an average Word file (not one done with proper styles or cleaned using Toxaris' Word add-in), convert it to ePub using Calibre and just see how poor the guts can be and how much work you have to do to clean it up.

[BetterRed]

@JSWolf - I wonder what percentage of book buyers look at the code, even if the typography is not exactly as they would prefer. At a guess I would think 1-2% tops, if indeed, even that.

Books are bought because of the quality of their content, not their markup.

BR

[DiapDealer]

It's a teensy-weensy, OCD/hobbyist fraction, of a sliver of the ebook-buying/reading public that will give two squats about the guts of your epub. The rest don't even know the book has guts to give squats about. So as long as it renders well on most devices (and the code doesn't look like pure soup), let your own conscience guide you about how nitpicky you ought to be about your code. The seven people your code could possibly offend will secretly be happier than a hog in mud that they have some new code to clean up and complain about anyway.