-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 60
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Support for mixed fixed layout and flowing #1708
Comments
I am not aware of any reading system that supports mixed layouts.
…--
Ori Idan CEO Helicon Books
http://www.heliconbooks.com
On Fri, Jun 18, 2021 at 12:39 AM bduga ***@***.***> wrote:
In issue #1606 <#1606> we decided
to require support for fixed layout content based on the fact that many
reading systems already support it, and it is useful for authors to be able
to rely on it. However, that means that mixed flowing and fixed layout
content is also now required, since we didn't explicitly say otherwise.
However, it is my belief that such mixed content is not well supported by
reading systems. If that is the case, should we consider marking such mixed
content as at risk? Or am I wrong and there are already multiple reading
systems that support such content?
—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#1708>, or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAB43QHBP4FWLSQJ475BBGTTTJTRRANCNFSM464PK3OA>
.
|
I have no problem making this explicit in the document and let CR decide whether there are at least two RS implementing this. |
Closing this issue as a test has been written, and we'll see how testing plays out. |
FYI, OverDrive Read (used by Libby) has had a full implementation of EPUB3 mixed layout (MXL) since about 2014. Libby is the #1-ranked EPUB reading system in both the App Store and the Play Store, and has many millions of daily active users. There's no lack of implementation, there's only a lack of publisher adoption. From personal experience designing a few test books, MXL titles always feel remarkably polished. It would be a shame to drop it from your spec due to under-implementation by other reading systems. |
In issue #1606 we decided to require support for fixed layout content based on the fact that many reading systems already support it, and it is useful for authors to be able to rely on it. However, that means that mixed flowing and fixed layout content is also now required, since we didn't explicitly say otherwise. However, it is my belief that such mixed content is not well supported by reading systems. If that is the case, should we consider marking such mixed content as at risk? Or am I wrong and there are already multiple reading systems that support such content?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: