8.6 is Rock Solid

pete6055 · 04-12-2015, 05:41 PM

Hi Kevin,

This afternoon I did extensive testing on Vista-64 of release 8.6, creating &/or editing a dozen epubs without any problem at all -- No crashes, TOC creation problem, "file jumping", lost files on close or anything else. In some of my tests I intentionally created html errors and Sigil handled them as I expected.

For those using Comodo Firewall, I noticed that the new exe did not automatically inherit the old HIPS settings. I had to manually reset Sigil as a trusted application before it would open. Anyone needing help doing this can contact me here and I'll post instructions at that time.

Nice release; it has my highest seal of approval.

Thanks,

Pete

P.S. In 8.7 can you give us an option to set the W3C validator to CSS 3.0? Right now it's hard-coded to 2.1, which doesn't support font-family, font-style or font-weight. I'd probaby make the standard to be used configurable in preferences, or remove W3C validation altogether, since this can be done by plugin (though some users will not want to install Python and update it as needed). Prior to version 7.0 CSS 3.0 was the default. Thanks again for all your hard work.

KevinH · 04-12-2015, 09:25 PM

Hi Pete,

Glad to hear it!

As for the validator, I think we just send a file in a form. That site defaults to CSS 2.1 according to its website. I will see if it will accept options on the form line. If so, we should be able to allow it to use css3.

The only thing is that we are working hard on the Sigil 0.9.0 series which brings multiple changes. Once that is out, I can add that css option. There just is a lot of work yet so it may be some time.

This Sigil 0.8.6 release will hopefully be the last release of this stable 0.8.x series unless more crashes are reported.

Thanks for testing!

Kevin

Toxaris · 04-13-2015, 01:44 AM

Oh no, not the CSS 2.1 vs 3.0 discussion again... Blood was spilled last time.

DiapDealer · 04-13-2015, 08:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toxaris

Oh no, not the CSS 2.1 vs 3.0 discussion again... Blood was spilled last time.

Wasn't it determined that CSS3 validation would give a clean bill of health to way too much stuff that isn't allowed (or won't work) in epub2? Seemed to me it would be including the bathwater with the baby when just the @font-face declarations were in question.

Surely CSS3 will be necessary with a version of Sigil that can create/view/edit HTML5 in EPUB3s, but until such time, I think it would be a mistake to validate the slew of stuff that won't work in EPUB2 just to make the @font-face errors go away. The "Why isn't this working when it clearly validates?" questions would go through the roof. Still ... if it was a configurable user choice, one could always say, "you chose the wrong spec."

KevinH · 04-13-2015, 09:33 AM

Hi,

I did not realize that CSS 2 vs CSS 3 was a religious war of some sort!! I am still fighting the emacs vs vi and kde vs gnome battles ;-)

For epub3 support it will have to be an option in settings or based on your current content.opf package tag. We may be able to bring in a python based css validator to replace the whole web version.

Thanks for the head's up.

KevinH

DiapDealer · 04-13-2015, 09:46 AM

I don't know if it's a religious war, as such.

It's just that on one hand you have the "validates, but leaves one error (that really works in your epub anyway)" side against the "validates with no errors, but much of it might not work in your epub2 and you'll have no idea why" side.

An epub aware css validator would be the ideal solution.

Toxaris · 04-13-2015, 02:58 PM

Diap described it perfectly. If I remember correctly the validation was changed a couple of times between 2.1 and 3. I think the current situation is best, since Sigil is still an ePUB2 program.

pete6055 · 04-14-2015, 05:39 PM

Hello All,

I've had a chance to review your responses to my suggestion regarding the W3C validator. Everything said is true: it is an old and contentious issue, but I feel a little different about it.

I'm willing to let user's set the option that works for them, fully aware that they might choose the wrong standard. I don't believe "The "Why isn't this working when it clearly validates?" questions would go through the roof." because the W3C validator lets you know what version your css entries are valid in. (see attached)

Moreover, by giving the user's a choice now, we will be better prepared for HTML5 and Epub3 and users can gain experience with the fix in the meantime. Most question on this issue will have long been answered and a note in the help file should be added to address remaining concerns.

An epub aware plugin might work just as well, but standards change from time to time and so must the plugin. An easier solution might be to have Sigil link to http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/#validate_by_upload, which gives you a full range of options. Best of all, W3C does the maintenence now and forever!

It would be great if Sigil passed the css file as it does now, but you can always manually select it from this link, so why jump through hoops?

Thanks for considering all this for 9.0 or beyond. I strongly agree with Kevin that a special release is unnecessary.

Pete

04-12-2015, 05:41 PM	#1
pete6055 Connoisseur Posts: 72 Karma: 10 Join Date: Nov 2012 Device: none	8.6 is Rock Solid Hi Kevin, This afternoon I did extensive testing on Vista-64 of release 8.6, creating &/or editing a dozen epubs without any problem at all -- No crashes, TOC creation problem, "file jumping", lost files on close or anything else. In some of my tests I intentionally created html errors and Sigil handled them as I expected. For those using Comodo Firewall, I noticed that the new exe did not automatically inherit the old HIPS settings. I had to manually reset Sigil as a trusted application before it would open. Anyone needing help doing this can contact me here and I'll post instructions at that time. Nice release; it has my highest seal of approval. Thanks, Pete P.S. In 8.7 can you give us an option to set the W3C validator to CSS 3.0? Right now it's hard-coded to 2.1, which doesn't support font-family, font-style or font-weight. I'd probaby make the standard to be used configurable in preferences, or remove W3C validation altogether, since this can be done by plugin (though some users will not want to install Python and update it as needed). Prior to version 7.0 CSS 3.0 was the default. Thanks again for all your hard work. Last edited by pete6055; 04-12-2015 at 06:15 PM.

04-14-2015, 05:39 PM	#8
pete6055 Connoisseur Posts: 72 Karma: 10 Join Date: Nov 2012 Device: none	You are all right, but... Hello All, I've had a chance to review your responses to my suggestion regarding the W3C validator. Everything said is true: it is an old and contentious issue, but I feel a little different about it. I'm willing to let user's set the option that works for them, fully aware that they might choose the wrong standard. I don't believe "The "Why isn't this working when it clearly validates?" questions would go through the roof." because the W3C validator lets you know what version your css entries are valid in. (see attached) Moreover, by giving the user's a choice now, we will be better prepared for HTML5 and Epub3 and users can gain experience with the fix in the meantime. Most question on this issue will have long been answered and a note in the help file should be added to address remaining concerns. An epub aware plugin might work just as well, but standards change from time to time and so must the plugin. An easier solution might be to have Sigil link to http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/#validate_by_upload, which gives you a full range of options. Best of all, W3C does the maintenence now and forever! It would be great if Sigil passed the css file as it does now, but you can always manually select it from this link, so why jump through hoops? Thanks for considering all this for 9.0 or beyond. I strongly agree with Kevin that a special release is unnecessary. Pete Attached Thumbnails Last edited by pete6055; 04-14-2015 at 05:55 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
looking for a solid first e-reader	drizzle	Which one should I buy?	27	11-22-2013 11:32 AM
Solid orange light	Kennyr	Kobo Tablets	4	12-30-2011 07:53 AM
Solid Gold iPad	Lotus Esprit	Apple Devices	7	05-15-2010 10:22 PM
Solid State E-Books	yvanleterrible	Workshop	43	10-12-2006 01:04 PM

04-12-2015, 09:25 PM	#2
KevinH Sigil Developer Posts: 8,478 Karma: 5703586 Join Date: Nov 2009 Device: many	Hi Pete, Glad to hear it! As for the validator, I think we just send a file in a form. That site defaults to CSS 2.1 according to its website. I will see if it will accept options on the form line. If so, we should be able to allow it to use css3. The only thing is that we are working hard on the Sigil 0.9.0 series which brings multiple changes. Once that is out, I can add that css option. There just is a lot of work yet so it may be some time. This Sigil 0.8.6 release will hopefully be the last release of this stable 0.8.x series unless more crashes are reported. Thanks for testing! Kevin

04-13-2015, 01:44 AM	#3
Toxaris Wizard Posts: 4,520 Karma: 121692313 Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Heemskerk, NL Device: PRS-T1, Kobo Touch, Kobo Aura	Oh no, not the CSS 2.1 vs 3.0 discussion again... Blood was spilled last time.

04-13-2015, 09:33 AM	#5
KevinH Sigil Developer Posts: 8,478 Karma: 5703586 Join Date: Nov 2009 Device: many	Hi, I did not realize that CSS 2 vs CSS 3 was a religious war of some sort!! I am still fighting the emacs vs vi and kde vs gnome battles ;-) For epub3 support it will have to be an option in settings or based on your current content.opf package tag. We may be able to bring in a python based css validator to replace the whole web version. Thanks for the head's up. KevinH

04-13-2015, 09:46 AM	#6
DiapDealer Grand Sorcerer Posts: 28,358 Karma: 203720150 Join Date: Jan 2010 Device: Nexus 7, Kindle Fire HD	I don't know if it's a religious war, as such. It's just that on one hand you have the "validates, but leaves one error (that really works in your epub anyway)" side against the "validates with no errors, but much of it might not work in your epub2 and you'll have no idea why" side. An epub aware css validator would be the ideal solution.

04-13-2015, 02:58 PM	#7
Toxaris Wizard Posts: 4,520 Karma: 121692313 Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Heemskerk, NL Device: PRS-T1, Kobo Touch, Kobo Aura	Diap described it perfectly. If I remember correctly the validation was changed a couple of times between 2.1 and 3. I think the current situation is best, since Sigil is still an ePUB2 program.

Advert

Advert