PageEdit-1.2.0 Released

[DiapDealer]

PageEdit-1.2.0

PageEdit-1.2.0 is primarily a bug fix release.

Bug Fixes

• fix issues when using PageEdit to edit epubs from outside of Sigil's environment
  • properly detect and handle non utf-8 encodings
  • properly convert html to xhtml syntax
  • properly add the xml header file where needed

The latest official PageEdit user guide can always be downloaded from its own repository. There's also a user-created guide that can be found here.

The binary downloads (and source) can be found as assets at the bottom of the PageEdit Github Release page.

[BetterRed]

Would you anticipate any problems running PageEdit 1.2 from Sigil 1.0 via Brook Bowser->content.opf->Open With... ?

Take Care

BR

[DiapDealer]

I wouldn't expect any trouble, no. The programs don't really mingle in any dangerous or meaningful way. Just files watched for changes.

[BetterRed]

Thanks, I didn't think it would.

For some reason PE has stopped working from calibre's opf->open with - probably my fault, but I figured I should install the new PE before investigating further.

I don't want to upgrade Sigil until I 'need' to.

BR

[KevinH]

The only significant change to PageEdit for 1.2.0 was to fix issues PageEdit had when working with epub files when used without Sigil involved at all. PageEdit should now handle non-utf-8 encoded files (it is always given utf-8 files when used with Sigil).

So nothing to impact Calibre's open with usage should have happened. What errors or problems are you seeing?

[BetterRed]

Hi Kevin,

I can't recall what the error was precisely, except it was a file not found. I need to find time to investigate. Pretty sure it's either the way I've hooked PE into calibre, or its a calibre issue because I could PE the same book from Sigil's open with on the opf in the same book.

I've been roped into supervising my neighbours kids learning from home, whilst their mother copes with working from home - so I'm a bit short of time.

Damn it: I took a peek, calibre editor isn't unpacking the epub to the same temp folder where it puts the opf that goes to PE via its Open With. It seems to create a separate temp folder for every file that's opened via it's Open With. I can't even find the unpacked book

Maybe using PE from calibre isn't as easy as I thought, but why did I think it worked before - for me its not important, I use both editors.

Aside : I hope nobody thinks your checkpoint feature is synonymous with the calibre editor's checkpoint feature.

Take care - BR

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by BetterRed

Aside : I hope nobody thinks your checkpoint feature is synonymous with the calibre editor's checkpoint feature.

Not sure I follow.
If you mean you hope they don't think the features are identical, then sure, there's lots of differences. But the bottom line is that both provide a means to save an epub in various states, diff the changes between the current state and any saved checkpoint, and the ability to restore any of those previously saved states. That's fairly synonymous in my book. The Sigil feature is still in its infancy, as well.

Or did you mean something else?

[KevinH]

Yes, I wondered the same thing.

Kovid has designed an interface for a "container" that creates hard links (two paths names to the exact same file) plus he can detect when changes are made and knows when to split that hard link into two separate links (a real copy on write/modification) approach. It is actually quite nice and similar to what we do in our plugin interface but at a greater scale. This allows him to make almost instantaneous file "copies" or "backups" and only incur the cost of a real file copy when absolutely needed.

We can not use that approach in Sigil in general as there are too many ways to change individual files and Sigil was not designed for that approach in mind. Plus Qt QHash did not support keeping attribute order unlike Python. So we had to create a simple Qt QHash variant to keep attribute order and then decided to use a git repository and actual checkins and things to store versions of the file and to produce diffs. They should be basically the same thing but his approach will be faster, whereas our approach can be used with external git tools/reports/etc. So each has its pluses and minuses but both should functionally do the same things. Allow reasonably fast versioned saves and restores if needed.

[Doitsu]

Originally Posted by BetterRed

Aside : I hope nobody thinks your checkpoint feature is synonymous with the calibre editor's checkpoint feature.

IMHO, one major advantage of the Sigil implementation is that checkpoints are permanently stored and don't get lost once a book is closed.

[BetterRed]

I knew they're not the same. My concern was that others who uses both editors might think a checkpoint taken in one of them would be accessible in the other one.

One the maxims that my English teachers drummed into me was: 'Use not the same word with different meanings nor yet the different words with the same meaning.' The value of that became very apparent when I started teaching ESL classes.

To avoid potential confusion I probably would have opted for a different label - 'versioning' perhaps.

And my 'synonymous' probably should have been 'equivalent'

BR

[KevinH]

Actually if Calibre's checkpoints go away when you close the book, there is little Sigil could do to actually use one in any way. That said, writing a calibre plugin to extract a epub from a git archive would be quite easy to do.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by BetterRed

I knew they're not the same. My concern was that others who uses both editors might think a checkpoint taken in one of them would be accessible in the other one.

One the maxims that my English teachers drummed into me was: 'Use not the same word with different meanings nor yet the different words with the same meaning.' The value of that became very apparent when I started teaching ESL classes.

To avoid potential confusion I probably would have opted for a different label - 'versioning' perhaps.

And my 'synonymous' probably should have been 'equivalent'

BR

Checkpoints is what they are, so checkpoints is what they're called. The notion of checkpoints in software existed long before Sigil or Calibre, so I fail to see any need whatsoever to reinvent the wheel by calling it something else. You're waaaay overthinking this.

I don't think anyone will be at all confused over it. And for the few who might be, there's two communities to help set them straight.

[BetterRed]

Gee - you guys sure do know how to make a mountain out of molehill. It was an 'aside', a casual remark - end of.

Wash your hands

BR

[DiapDealer]

Yeah right. We're the ones making mountains out of molehills. Nice try.