How do I change italic <i> shortcut to use <em> instead?

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by TheTechAuthor

That was an interesting read. Thank you.

However, my main concern is getting a workflow that "just works" across KDP, Google Play Books, and iTunesConnect. Right now, from a speed perspective at least, <em> for emphasising words and <b> for bolding words is the quickest - for me.

I need to work within the currently accepted rules of whatever digital eBook store I want to sell on. And, as it currently stands, as valid as <I> is, it's not accepted in ePub 3 by every eBook retailer. Sadly.

<em> is no faster then <i>. There's no difference between them. If your text is already using <i>, just let it be. There's nothing wrong with <i>.

[TheTechAuthor]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

<em> is no faster then <i>. There's no difference between them. If your text is already using <i>, just let it be. There's nothing wrong with <i>.

There is a difference in the context of submitting the final file. When you upload it to both Google Books and iTunesconnect, they scan the epub before accepting it for sale. If they are unhappy with anything that they don't like, you must fix the issues before you can resubmit the ePub for selling on their storefront.

And if none of them have an issue with using <em>, then it's an annoyance that I'll have to live with if I want to use their storefronts.

[DiapDealer]

Are they actively blocking uploads that use i tags? Or just floating scary warnings? As already noted, there is plenty of content available from Google Play Books that make liberal use of i tags.

[TheTechAuthor]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

Are they actively blocking uploads that use i tags? Or just floating scary warnings? As already noted, there is plenty of content available from Google Play Books that make liberal use of i tags.

I have them blocked on step 1 of 6, with a link that displays a pop up with the .XHTML page ID and line number of the error(s). Apple rejects it in the iTunesConnect uploader.

Regadless, in the interests of content reuse, I need to use the same tags across all digital bookstores. Otherwise, it becomes a big mess to maintain.

[DiapDealer]

You didn't actually mention Google Play Books in that last post. Inquiring minds want to know. I understand perfectly wanting to use code that just works across all platforms, but I also think it's important to understand if your intimation that Google Play Books might be blocking epubs that contain i tags is accurate. Did you mean step 1 of 6 in Google Play Books submission process? Also please note that Google Books and Google Play Books are not the same thing.

Also, is Google Play Publish the only way to submit books tor sale? Or are there other options? Are EPUB2s the only books not allowing i tags, or are EPUB3s blocked as well? Or is it vice-versa?

The fact of the matter is: everyone here is perfectly aware that iBooks is often the odd man out in these matters. That's old hat. But I'd like to be able to confirm whether or not Google Play Books has joined them in this active silliness (and to what exact extent, if so).

[TheTechAuthor]

Fair point. I'll deliberately stick in a rogue <i> tag at the end of my next submission and see what the end results are for both stores. Do note, that I'm not creating a iBook (which uses the .iBook extension). I'm just straight uploading the ePub 3 file for sale.

[Tex2002ans]

Originally Posted by TheTechAuthor

That was an interesting read. Thank you.

Originally Posted by TheTechAuthor

However, my main concern is getting a workflow that "just works" across KDP, Google Play Books, and iTunesConnect. Right now, from a speed perspective at least, <em> for emphasising words and <b> for bolding words is the quickest - for me.

If flipping between <i> and <em>, then I agree with JSWolf's recommendation of DiapDealer's "TagMechanic".

Or if using Calibre's Editor, his fantastic plugin, "Diap's Editing Toolbag".

Both make it trivial to change:

<p>This is an <i>italics</i>.</p>

into:

<p>This is an <em>italics</em>.</p>

Sigil Instructions for TagMechanic



1. In Sigil, highlight all the files you want to adjust. (Shift- or Ctrl-Click to highlight multiple files.)

2. In the menus, select Plugins > Edit > TagMechanic.

3. Set your settings just like this image:



Action Type: Modify
Tag name: i
Having the attribute: No attributes ("naked" tag)
Change tag to: em

4. Press the "Process" button, and this will flip all your <i> to <em>.

Originally Posted by TheTechAuthor

I need to work within the currently accepted rules of whatever digital eBook store I want to sell on. And, as it currently stands, as valid as <I> is, it's not accepted in ePub 3 by every eBook retailer.

Just like others are asking, I would be interested in many more details too.

[DNSB]

One item that perhaps Google and Apple should keep in mind is the <i> tag is italic while <em> tag is emphasized which is traditionally but not necessarily italic, it can be bold or underlined or whatever. At one time, I used a HTML help file reader app that rendered <em> as underlined. The author of the application felt that underlining was a better method of emphasizing the text.

[JSWolf]

I just checked and the latest Star Trek eBook (ePub 3) uses <i> and does not use <em>. Google books sells this. Apple sells this. Amazon sells this.

So I would say that you don't have to use <em> as <i> is being sold.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

I just checked and the latest Star Trek eBook (ePub 3) uses <i> and does not use <em>. Google books sells this. Apple sells this. Amazon sells this.

So I would say that you don't have to use <em> as <i> is being sold.

Not necessarily. The submission process is rarely the same for individuals and traditional publishing houses. It is not at all inconceivable that the rules are different for different publishing paths/toolchains.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

Not necessarily. The submission process is rarely the same for individuals and traditional publishing houses. It is not at all inconceivable that the rules are different for different publishing paths/toolchains.

Why would it be different enough where you have to use <em> instead of <i>? Clearly <i> works or nobody would be allowed to use <i>.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

Why would it be different enough where you have to use <em> instead of <i>? Clearly <i> works or nobody would be allowed to use <i>.

Why is a duck, Jon? Different things are different. The code "working" on readers has nothing to do with whether submission/validation warnings errors are issued--up to and including the prevention of uploads.

Please stop arguing about things that aren't actually being discussed here. The question is not whether i tags "work", or even whether books exist on those platforms that use i tags. The question is whether uploads to store platforms are being prevented by the presence of i tags under certain conditions. If you have no direct knowledge of the verification/acceptance process when uploading books to sell on Google Play or iBooks, then your part in this discussion is at an end.

[Turtle91]

Logic is never part of the equation when talking about automated processes....

[BetterRed]

Originally Posted by Turtle91

Logic is never part of the equation when talking about automated processes....

Including people with automated responses.

But, what I wanna know is, who bought <i>, see post 24.

BR

[Hitch]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

Not necessarily. The submission process is rarely the same for individuals and traditional publishing houses. It is not at all inconceivable that the rules are different for different publishing paths/toolchains.

They are. Absolutely.

Nonetheless, please, people, S&R'ing em for i or Vice-versa is nothing. It's not even 30 seconds' work.

If someone wants to do that, they can do it in the HTML editor that they deploy pre-Sigil. If they're not using an HTML editor pre-Sigil, perhaps they ought. If they are using the bloody Sigil button, perhaps they should work in code.

No matter what, changing i to em is NOTHING to do. It's easiest to change all of them to em, if that's what works for GoogleBooks.

Personally (warning OPINION HERE), the number of book sales, for the vast, vast majority of my clients, from GoogleBooks is so damned minute, I wouldn't bother, but as I said, if needed, it's no biggie to make 30 seconds' worth of edits. Make a clip, save it, hit the button, Bob's-yer-uncle.

Right?

Hitch