Why is it so hard to preserve blank lines?

[jackie_w]

Originally Posted by Jim Chapman

Regarding the 'right' way to represent vertical space in epub files ...

Whether it's the 'right' way or the 'wrong' way, the unfortunate reality is that a large percentage of retail epubs (at least 50% in my experience) do use the 'empty paragraph' method for creating vertical space. So anyone creating reading apps for the general public needs to display them correctly.

[Ripplinger]

Originally Posted by Jim Chapman

Regarding the 'right' way to represent vertical space in epub files: It is pretty clear that using a p element containing only   is an ugly hack, and is the wrong thing to do...

And the other unfortunate reality is that it works across most (if not all) ereaders and apps, even converting with Calibre retains the space even when you have it checked to remove all spaces between lines. It's a simple solution that just works, even if not an elegant solution or correct.

[Toxaris]

Originally Posted by Jim Chapman

Regarding the 'right' way to represent vertical space in epub files: It is pretty clear that using a p element containing only   is an ugly hack, and is the wrong thing to do...

I don't agree. It is ugly, but it is not wrong even when considering web standards. After all, an e-book is not an webpage even if it uses web technology.
Like I said, the purists use margins to create the empty lines and they are of course correct. It is the 'best' way to do it. However, the sad part is that a lot of reading programs and even some readers ignore parts or even the complete stylesheet and overrule it with their own. This of course removes all the section breaks you had. Using the [noparse]<p>&nbsp;</p>[noparse] is a fail-safe method and completely legal/allowed. Empty paragraphs should be ignored according to the web-standards you mention and usually are. However, this is not an empty paragraph and should not be ignored according to the same standards.

So, unless all the readers/reading applications play ball, it is the only failsafe method. Personal feelings aside of course.

[Robotech_Master]

The discussion was interesting enough so far I wrote up my thoughts on the matter and posted it here to maybe spark some discussion among TeleRead folks.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Robotech_Master

The discussion was interesting enough so far I wrote up my thoughts on the matter and posted it here to maybe spark some discussion among TeleRead folks.

Is there any way to get back the old TeleRead? The new website is just way too busy. The old website was nice and simple and easy to use. The new site is just a mess. That more stories slideup is really annoying.

Please please fix the layout. What's there now is not good.

[Robotech_Master]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

Is there any way to get back the old TeleRead? The new website is just way too busy. The old website was nice and simple and easy to use. The new site is just a mess. That more stories slideup is really annoying.

Please please fix the layout. What's there now is not good.

If you look at most professional blogs these days, you'll find some kind of similar layout. We're trying to be taken more seriously as an e-book blog, and we worry that many readers might be turned off by a twenty-year-old look when other sites have a much newer look and feel. Also, it's what our advertisers prefer...and courting advertisers is important for little things like being able to pay our writers and hosting costs without going bankrupt.

But David notes it's not set in stone and that we're willing to experiment a little, if we can do that without annoying advertisers. In the mean while, TeleRead still works great as an RSS feed, too.

ETA: We've tried disabling the slider now, see if that works better.

[davidrothman]

Many thanks for the feedback, JS. Yes, Chris put it well. Nothing is set in stone.

I don't want the current MobileRead thread to wander off topic, but people with further thoughts on TeleRead's layout can reach Chris at robotech.master@gmail.com and me at davidrothman@pobox.com. For e-book newbies who don't know, Chris is TeleRead's editor. I'm publisher. We date back to the 1990s and are the oldest site devoted to general-interest news and views on e-books. We're big MR fans.

RSS feed is http://feeds.feedburner.com/teleread/KHnj . Our page to receive daily emails is http://www.teleread.com/sign-up-for-...from-teleread/ . JS, I hope that helps you and others who want to see TeleRead in a different layout.

Thanks,
David

[JSWolf]

Without the slider is better. The RSS feed is pretty good, but it just stops. Can the RSS feed be fixed so it doesn't just stop?

[JSWolf]

To answer the topic's question, because a good number of apps ignore perfectly valid coding in ePub.

[Jim Chapman]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

To answer the topic's question, because a good number of apps ignore perfectly valid coding in ePub.

Reality check: using <p>&nbsp;</p> to represent a section break is 'valid' in the limited sense that the XHTML standard says that it is acceptable XHTML. But because the XHTML standard is not explicit about how you should display non-rendering non-whitespace, it does not tell us what a reading system has to do with that valid coding. It would be acceptable to ignore it (on the grounds that it is a P element containing no renderable content). It would also be acceptable to add a line containing nothing (on the grounds that it is a P element containing non-whitespace characters).

Sorry about the pedantry - but you know what it's like when someone is wrong on the internet ;-)

I agree that, pragmatically, the smart thing for e-reading systems is to treat <p>&nbsp;</p> as a section break, at least as an optional behaviour. It's just that you're using the word 'valid' a bit too loosely.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Jim Chapman

Reality check: using <p>&nbsp;</p> to represent a section break is 'valid' in the limited sense that the XHTML standard says that it is acceptable XHTML. But because the XHTML standard is not explicit about how you should display non-rendering non-whitespace, it does not tell us what a reading system has to do with that valid coding. It would be acceptable to ignore it (on the grounds that it is a P element containing no renderable content). It would also be acceptable to add a line containing nothing (on the grounds that it is a P element containing non-whitespace characters).

I can you an example of a reading application that does ignore "<p>&nbsp;</p>": Mobipocket Reader. A rather elderly program, to be sure, but nonetheless it will completely ignore that code and not display any vertical space for it at all.

[fanficdude1]

I think you can tell to use the book's css instead of it's own.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Jim Chapman

Sorry about the pedantry - but you know what it's like when someone is wrong on the internet ;-)

I feel for you being wrong on the Internet.

I agree that, pragmatically, the smart thing for e-reading systems is to treat <p>&nbsp;</p> as a section break, at least as an optional behaviour. It's just that you're using the word 'valid' a bit too loosely.

<p>&nbsp;</p> is not just used as a section break. I've seen it used not as a section break, but as as a separator such as...

<p>Some paragraph here</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p class="center">This line is centered</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Another paragraph here</p>

So yes, <p>&nbsp;</p> should be rendered. I know it's not the coding I would use, but a lot of eBooks have it. This is why I go in and check what the publisher has done.

[Robotech_Master]

Wrote more on this issue.

[Robotech_Master]

Well, how about that? Scrivener's developer has chimed in with a more complete explanation of why Scrivener uses non-breaking space paragraphs. It effectively boils down to Scrivener using Apple's HTML 4.0 conversion tool to turn its documents into EPUB-ready HTML, and that's how Apple does it.