Q2: (Bug?) Import Style sheets

[phossler]

If I import style sheets, and then Link with [Replace Existing] checked, it seems that the href file name is correct, but the rest of the part is not

After manual editing, it's then OK

Paul

[kovidgoyal]

I see nothing incorrect there. Presumably the html file is in a different folder from the imported css file.

[phossler]

I was having issues trying to use Calibre Editor and force fit it into a Sigil folder structure

I believe that I should follow your earlier suggestions and

1) Remember that this is not Sigil and I need to un-learn things, and

2) Epubs don't care about the internal folder structure so stop fighting it

Thanks, and please keep up the development efforts

Paul

[eschwartz]

You can always right-click and rename any file; if you include "/" it will recognize that as a folder structure. "Styles/stylesheet.css" will put stylesheet.css into the Styles folder.

[phossler]

Originally Posted by eschwartz

You can always right-click and rename any file; if you include "/" it will recognize that as a folder structure. "Styles/stylesheet.css" will put stylesheet.css into the Styles folder.

Kovid had recommended that earlier, but I was not doing it correctly

Eventually I 'renamed' 6 files into folders. It worked, but was a little tedious but it worked

The other thing that I was struggling with was the CSS with @font-face url's. I had to un-learn some Sigil and change the url's below

/* ----------------------------------------------*/
/* Style sheet to use Charis fonts --------------*/
/* ----------------------------------------------*/

@font-face {
    font-family: 'Charis SIL ModifiedLarger';
    font-weight: normal;
    font-style: normal;
    src: url('../Fonts/CharisSIL-R.ttf');
}

@font-face {
    font-family: 'Charis SIL ModifiedLarger';
    font-weight: bold;
    font-style: normal;
    src: url('../Fonts/CharisSIL-B.ttf');
}

@font-face {
    font-family: 'Charis SIL ModifiedLarger';
    font-weight: normal;
    font-style: italic;
    src: url('../Fonts/CharisSIL-I.ttf');
}

@font-face {
    font-family: 'Charis SIL ModifiedLarger';
    font-weight: bold;
    font-style: italic;
    src: url('../Fonts/CharisSIL-BI.ttf');
}

html, body {
	height: 100%;
	margin: 0;
	padding:0;
	border-width: 0;
	font-family:"Charis SIL ModifiedLarger",serif;
}

@page {
	margin: 5pt;
}

Paul

[eschwartz]

What we need is an option/plugin to "sort resources into folders".

[AnotherCat]

Originally Posted by eschwartz

What we need is an option/plugin to "sort resources into folders".

Even one to just flatten them all into the root would be a help. When I encounter an existing book with a muddled structure I find myself just opening and saving it in Sigil so it is in a known structure to work from.

[BobC]

I think one of the slightly confusing things about the editor is that the "Book Browser" pane appears to show files within a folder structure, and if the book was edited with Sigil everything fits nicely. However the Editor's Book Browser is displaying by function not by location.

It takes a bit of getting used to - the only way I have discovered to work out just what is stored where is by hovering over the files and looking at the status line.

A useful option would be to allow the Book Browser to display by location or by function according to the user's preference.

BobC

[theducks]

Originally Posted by BobC

I think one of the slightly confusing things about the editor is that the "Book Browser" pane appears to show files within a folder structure, and if the book was edited with Sigil everything fits nicely. However the Editor's Book Browser is displaying by function not by location.

It takes a bit of getting used to - the only way I have discovered to work out just what is stored where is by hovering over the files and looking at the status line.

A useful option would be to allow the Book Browser to display by location or by function according to the user's preference.

BobC

Good point!

If the files are not required to be by structure, then the default should be Not Shown as IF they were.
Just stick with the OS default file/folder display. Both Windows and Linux offer a right click option to Arrange by Type or Name

By common usage: folders are shown to the LEFT (with content indented in tree view)
Windows has a Group by: There is NO ICON for the grouping description and the list is not indented (I also assume that only a List will be allowed, since list order is important). Ubuntu also has a

Since Folders are allowed: New Folder should allow for a usage choice that provides a folder with the appropriate Icon (and maybe some sort of internal tracking for managing 'actions' use). They also may need to allow nesting (omnibus built by just combining books , no common styles/images/ (can/should NCX, OPF, fonts, be shared?)

[kovidgoyal]

Nope. They are not shown as if by structure. They are shown by file type. People coming from Sigil assume they are shown by structure because it looks like Sigil's file browser. I am not going to cripple ebook edit just to conform to expectations of ex-Sigil users.

There will be a tool to automatically re-arrange the files in whatever folder structure you like so you can normalize the structure when starting work on a book. Other than that, I really have no interest in adding more UI for managing meaningless inside book folder structures. For the *vast* majority of books putting files in folders is utterly pointless. For the few where it might have a legitimate use, edit book actually allows you to put files in whatever folders make sense *to you*.

[theducks]

Originally Posted by kovidgoyal

Nope. They are not shown as if by structure. They are shown by file type. People coming from Sigil assume they are shown by structure because it looks like Sigil's file browser. I am not going to cripple ebook edit just to conform to expectations of ex-Sigil users.

There will be a tool to automatically re-arrange the files in whatever folder structure you like so you can normalize the structure when starting work on a book. Other than that, I really have no interest in adding more UI for managing meaningless inside book folder structures. For the *vast* majority of books putting files in folders is utterly pointless. For the few where it might have a legitimate use, edit book actually allows you to put files in whatever folders make sense *to you*.

I am doing my usual poor job of conveying things.
I am not advocating Sigil type Structure.

I am simply requesting a slight change on how you display the CURRENT used grouping to avoid confusion

Group type label (only)
<type icon> filename
<type icon> filename
<type icon> filename

Group2 type label (only)
<type icon> filename
<type icon> filename
<type icon> filename


No icons on group labels so they can't be mistaken for hierarchical structure.
No indent unless there is a folder where these files are located

[kovidgoyal]

Replicating the same icon on every file of the same type is redundant. It also makes it impossible to use the current emblems for indicating covers/opf/ncx files etc. In other words, it restricts the functionality of the files browser to cause less confusion for people that expect it to reflect a folder structure. I could certainly remove the indents, but then that will run counter to how every tree structure in every application works, potentially confusing far more people.

These are expectations that have built up over years of using Sigil. Just give it time, those expectations will dissolve. There is always some friction when migrating between similar but somewhat different software. That is inevitable.

One of my principles is to not restrict edit book to conform to UI expectations from Sigil, that is a long term losing proposition. Because once you choose a particular UI changing it in the future carries very high migration costs for software as popular as calibre.

[elibrarian]

Fwiw, I have a particularly nasty example of the consequenses of Calibres editor not showing the file structure. The file is a merge of five books to one, using Calibres plugin to merge epubs. The files are all jumbled in the editor's browser, but opening the same file in 7zip showed that it was actually quite well structured, with each book in a separate folder. (And to be just, Sigil didn't like it either, so I ended up doing the merge "by hand" so to speak.)



Regards,

Kim

[AnotherCat]

From my own selfish point of view what is being proposed is great.

@elibrarian:

Experiences with the epubmerge plugin with the multitude of folders it creates (including separate folders with files of duplicate content in them, such as when merged books have stylesheets some or all of which have the same content) is one of the reasons I suggested being able to flatten the folder structure. As I see it, what is proposed makes much of the workload I encounter in rationalising matters such as those go away as in most cases there does not seem to be any justification for a folder structure in a finished book merged from others.

[kovidgoyal]

@elibrarian: Your screenshot shows the files being listed in spine order. To me that is far more useful than showing them in a folder structure. Suppose the folders in the zip file were in the order 3 4 5 2 1 instead of 1 2 3 4 5 (the order of folders in a zip file is essentially random, it comes from when the folders were created inside the file). You would have a hard time doing the most basic task, advancing from one html file to the next, in order.

Furthermore, you can use the bulk rename tools to easily give the files better names, like book1-1-10.html book2-1-15.html and so on... That will take a couple of minutes and remove any advantage of the folder view or the files browser.