Seriously I don't see the problem. Ok maybe it's just my scripting/developer side speaking or maybe it's because I'm never expecting that much openness from App

Seriously I don't see the problem. Ok maybe it's just my scripting/developer side speaking or maybe it's because I'm never expecting that much openness from Apple. But if I were a publisher and I wanted to make a nice book, I would either do the following: if I already had a good authoring tool I would use it for any of the distributed platforms and if I didn't have any authoring tool and the one proposed by Apple was appealing to me but I wanted to remain portable accross platforms I would keep the form and content completely separated (as css is meant to html) and use the Apple tools to create a good format for the Apple platform and use something else for others platforms. I think the problem is not about standards or anything else, I think the problem is that we can't accept that a company creating so many appealing tools always put so much burden and restrictions in their use. Especially in this case where the tool is 'free' but has a very restrictive license. But as everything else, anyone is free to make a better product or an equivalent product with a better license, this is competition, this is good.