Adding "folders/categories" in a TOC

[phillipgessert]

I agree with others that conceptually this is totally an index, I've not seen a TOC that remixes and reshuffles duplicate targets according to categories, but that's pretty much exactly what an index does. So this is basically trying to do something a TOC doesn't, and to make it behave in ways the user doesn't expect.

Finding workarounds feels unfriendly to the reader. I'd be confused why I tapped an empty space and it took me anywhere at all, and I'd be confused if I tapped a labeled entry and it took me nowhere. Actually in both instances, I'd wonder why that was selectable at all. Basically, even if it worked, I don't think you should do it. IMO of course.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by phillipgessert

I agree with others that conceptually this is totally an index, I've not seen a TOC that remixes and reshuffles duplicate targets according to categories, but that's pretty much exactly what an index does. So this is basically trying to do something a TOC doesn't, and to make it behave in ways the user doesn't expect.

Finding workarounds feels unfriendly to the reader. I'd be confused why I tapped an empty space and it took me anywhere at all, and I'd be confused if I tapped a labeled entry and it took me nowhere. Actually in both instances, I'd wonder why that was selectable at all. Basically, even if it worked, I don't think you should do it. IMO of course.

But, the one thing I noticed in my example is that a single non-breaking space is not easy to hit. The problem comes with the other labels that should go noplace but have to go someplace.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Hitch

Jon:

That's good to know, but I believe that the querent wanted to reorganize and reorder the items inside the "folder," as in Jellby's post, above and that's the part where the cow eats the cabbage--trying to "fool" with an NCX out of order.

See what I mean?

Hitch

I do see a problem doing it in an NCX ToC. The labels that are not supposed to go anyplace have to go someplace.

Also, I would not like a ToC that has entries duplicated in another order.

As @phillipgessert has said, this really isn't the job for the ToC and that it's more an index.

I cannot remember seeing a ToC in this way be it an eBook or a pBook.

You don't have to fool with an NCX out of order. You just put in as many IDs s needed to go to where you want. But the labels that are not supposed to do anything are going to be a problem as they will have to point to someplace.

This idea for the ToC is a really bad idea and should not be done. make the alternate second part an index and let the ToC be the ToC.

[Hitch]

Originally Posted by phillipgessert

I agree with others that conceptually this is totally an index, I've not seen a TOC that remixes and reshuffles duplicate targets according to categories, but that's pretty much exactly what an index does. So this is basically trying to do something a TOC doesn't, and to make it behave in ways the user doesn't expect.

Finding workarounds feels unfriendly to the reader. I'd be confused why I tapped an empty space and it took me anywhere at all, and I'd be confused if I tapped a labeled entry and it took me nowhere. Actually in both instances, I'd wonder why that was selectable at all. Basically, even if it worked, I don't think you should do it. IMO of course.

Exactly--unfriendly to the reader is a good characterization. Sure, we can all argue that it's "really" an index, but push comes to shove, who gives a s**t? I mean, come on, gang, we're losing our minds if we're saying, "oh, sure, it's okay to create an HTML page and call it an index, and tell the user to use it, but OHMYGOD, if we call it a toc.html, the skies will fall." The Earth will cease to spin on her axis and we're all doomed. EEK!

What matters is making the material accessible and usable for the buyer. That's it. Getting out of the way, between the author/creator and the buyer and not inserting our own prejudices or likes/dislikes, etc. in the middle.

If the author says that clumping them together in some odd way makes more sense, hell, power to him or her. Call it a "Topic Index," put in HTML links and Go With God.

That's my $.02.

Hitch

[Detroa]

Hello everyone,

Thank you for all the additionnal answers and sorry for the late reply, lot of work these last few days.

First of all, sorry if I used the wrong terms or badly explained my issue. English is (obviously ) not my first language but there are very little ressources and knowledgeable people on the subject in my first language.

So, back on the subject, Jellby explained better than me what I'm trying to do:

Originally Posted by Jellby

I think the idea could be something like:

Spine order:
- Day 1
- Day 2
- Day 3
- Day 4
- Day 5

"Folder" TOC:
* Fun days
- Day 1
- Day 4
* Boring days
- Day 2
- Day 3
- Day 5

Where "-" are real links to actual sections in the book, and "*" are just TOC items that can be expanded/collapsed, but don't point anywhere in the book, because there's no appropriate place.

The reason I wanna do this is simply because a paper version of this book exists and its TOC is separated in three parts, each one listings all the chapters/pages of a certain type while they're not actually grouped in the actual book. That's a pretty common thing for art or cooking books' TOCs here.

The reason I really want to use a TOC.ncx is simply because I want the book to be fully epub 2 compatible for the older devices.

Unless I find a better solution, it seems to best thing to do would be to make an xhtml TOC directely included in the book and to make the TOC.ncx section entries point to it. It's not ideal but at least, it'll work on every device and won't make any entry points to a part of the book that doesn't make sense.

Thank you again

[Hitch]

Originally Posted by Detroa

Hello everyone,

Thank you for all the additionnal answers and sorry for the late reply, lot of work these last few days.

First of all, sorry if I used the wrong terms or badly explained my issue. English is (obviously ) not my first language but there are very little ressources and knowledgeable people on the subject in my first language.

So, back on the subject, Jellby explained better than me what I'm trying to do:



The reason I wanna do this is simply because a paper version of this book exists and its TOC is separated in three parts, each one listings all the chapters/pages of a certain type while they're not actually grouped in the actual book. That's a pretty common thing for art or cooking books' TOCs here.

The reason I really want to use a TOC.ncx is simply because I want the book to be fully epub 2 compatible for the older devices.

Unless I find a better solution, it seems to best thing to do would be to make an xhtml TOC directely included in the book and to make the TOC.ncx section entries point to it. It's not ideal but at least, it'll work on every device and won't make any entry points to a part of the book that doesn't make sense.

Thank you again

Uh....no. You cannot point the NCX entries to your TOC. The NCX entries are the device's internal TOC; it tells the device where, for example, "Chapter 4" is, in the zipped container that makes up your ePUB.

Don't screw with the NCX. If you want to make an HTML TOC and point those wherever the hell you want, great, but the NCX should be in the proper, correct order or your book will not work correctly.

Hitch

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Hitch

Uh....no. You cannot point the NCX entries to your TOC. The NCX entries are the device's internal TOC; it tells the device where, for example, "Chapter 4" is, in the zipped container that makes up your ePUB.

Don't screw with the NCX. If you want to make an HTML TOC and point those wherever the hell you want, great, but the NCX should be in the proper, correct order or your book will not work correctly.

Hitch

I've seen many NCX that have a "Contents" entry that points to the HTML ToC. While I think that's stupid, it's perfectly valid.

[Hitch]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

I've seen many NCX that have a "Contents" entry that points to the HTML ToC. While I think that's stupid, it's perfectly valid.

Oh, is that what s/he meant? I thought...never mind. Yes, sure, we do it all the time per customer requests/instructions and NO JON, you don't need to tell me it's stupid.

Believe me, brother, I know STOOPID. You'd love doing my gig for about two days and then, we'd all watch you have a mental meltdown right here on MR. The only reason I am not in Bellevue over this crap is because I have a wonderful team, through sheer serendipity.

Hitch

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Hitch

Oh, is that what s/he meant? I thought...never mind. Yes, sure, we do it all the time per customer requests/instructions and NO JON, you don't need to tell me it's stupid.

Believe me, brother, I know STOOPID. You'd love doing my gig for about two days and then, we'd all watch you have a mental meltdown right here on MR. The only reason I am not in Bellevue over this crap is because I have a wonderful team, through sheer serendipity.

Hitch

I fully believe that you've seen silly/stupid things I have not.

Have you ever shown your clients a properly done version vs. whatever it is they want to do that they should not do?

[Hitch]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

I fully believe that you've seen silly/stupid things I have not.

Have you ever shown your clients a properly done version vs. whatever it is they want to do that they should not do?

It's funny that you ask that. Right this minute, I have a really angry, upset customer (who has paid me under $200USD, by the way). He's convinced that we somehow rooked him.

The lad, whom we will call, say, Igor, was the book designer/co-creator/author (?) on a children's book. The book was sized for print at 8x10", or, to those of us paying attention, an aspect ratio of 1:1.25 (the height is 1.25x the width, right?).

He said he couldn't get the book to "look right" when he tried to make an eBook. This 46-page print book has a 1.6GIG (yes, you read that right, gigabyte) InDesign file, for some crackbrained reason. (Do not get me started about the incredibly bad file-size hygiene that print designers have, especially those with Macs. It's boggling.)

So, he has some print edits he wants, which we make and then he wants us to make the ebooks, which we do--in FIXED LAYOUT, as it's an illustrated children's book.

He replies, when he gets it, that this is the same "result" that he had, using Kindle Create. (sigh). His pages don't "fill the screen." I explain, nicely, about aspect ratios and how the only want to make an image fill the screen, on a book, is to distort it, if the image is a 1:1.25 and the screen is a 1:1.6, right? And then I tell him also that there isn't any One Size To Fill Them All, around images and pages and eBooks, much less in Kindle alone. I

If I'd KNOWN that his issue was, the pages not filling the screen, I'd have never accepted the job. I mean...who wants to distort the admittedly decent illustrations? But that's the bottom line here--we either distort them, or he's going to do (whatever).

Now I'm getting angry threatening emails, telling me he's going to "report me" or "file a complaint" (with whom, one wonders?) and that he's upset that I have refused to CALL HIM (under $200, remember) and explain exactly what we did. I'm like...what? I'm under no obligation to tell you what we did, step-by-step and train you in our workflow.

He sends me an image, from some other website, that shows how this one book's cover "fills the screen." It's a simple novel, with a cover designed to FIT the Kindle Fire tablet screen. By now, I'm grinding my teeth and I download the same godd*mn novel, and I take screencaps of the cover on 3 different devices--my Fire 10", my Oasis and my Samsung Note 9--and of course, the cover only "fills" the screne on the Fire 10". Somebody deliberately designed that cover to appease the author, let's face it. when s/he looked at it, on Kindle Previewer 3, in Fire mode (tablet). They bet that s/he wouldn't look at it in eReader mode, or Phone mode, and patently, s/he didn't.

I've sent him the images, showing him how this "perfect" image, isn't. I keep waiting for Igor to GET IT. Oh, did I mention, he also wants his money back? After what is now, IDK, 2-3 hours of emails, in addition to the actual book work?

Under $200. This is life as a commercial bookmaker/eBookmaker today. I have customers, Jon, that can't click links. I'm not kidding. They use one of those .rr. ISPs, which apparently controls you even when you don't wish to be. I have customers that can't open PDFs. Can't find the address or search bar, in "The Google."

Most of my bookmakers and ebookmakers work for me because they sh*tcanned working with customers directly. Couldn't take it, so it's worth it to them to earn less per book, so that they don't have to deal with them. Even then, they burn out. Our CSRs have an extraordinarily high burn out rate. I won't tell you how many have had that job and then left to do something less stressful, like being a Flight Attendant.

People think that some of what I post here or at KDP is funny, and admittedly, I try to relate the situations humorously, to burn them off myself--but I've aged a quarter-century over the last dozen years. The thousandth time you have to tell someone "eBooks don't have pages," your brain melts.

Hitch

[JSWolf]

@hitch,

Wow! That's one heck of a problematic customer. I would guess that he's the type to set his TV to fill to prevent the black bars.

You do deserve a medal for your patience. I'm not sure I could be as able to deal with people like that without saying something I shouldn't.

I do remember a long time ago on MR that a number of people wanted to know how to make the covers fill the screen even though they've been told that it's not going to show the correct aspect ratio.

Part of the problem with eBooks that's been for a long time is the fact that whoever is making them

[Notjohn]

>Our CSRs have an extraordinarily high burn out rate. I won't tell you how many have had that job and then left to do something less stressful, like being a Flight Attendant.

I once had a wonderful cover designer who worked at a reasonable rate, but she gave it up to WRITE BOOKS.

>I would guess that he's the type to set his TV to fill to prevent the black bars.

Oh gosh, I do that!

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Notjohn

>I would guess that he's the type to set his TV to fill to prevent the black bars.

Oh gosh, I do that!

AH HA! So you're the really annoying customer of Hitch's.

[Hitch]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

AH HA! So you're the really annoying customer of Hitch's.

No, no, don't be silly, Notjohn annoys me for free.

Hitch

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Hitch

No, no, don't be silly, Notjohn annoys me for free.

Hitch

You really should to charge him for that, And he needs to fix his TV settings.