3 ms·
I see a couple of roadblocks for this. One is that is suggestion of a restrictive subset of HTML for coding seems like a potential accessibility problem, which
by Finnucane 3y ago
I see a couple of roadblocks for this. One is that is suggestion of a restrictive subset of HTML for coding seems like a potential accessibility problem, which is to say, you'd have to make your documents less semantically rich. For instance, he seems to be suggesting using. It's already hard enough to get epubs to work right when reading systems lag behind what browsers can support, saying 'let's have less' is not going to make things easier if you have complex content. The problem is not that there is too much html or css, the problem is that reading systems don't support them properly.
Also, most dedicated reading systems (Kindle, Kobo, etc) don't allow javascript, which means your components will not work. That might of course change, but I wouldn't hold my breath for it.
- velcrovan 3y ago> One is that is suggestion of a restrictive subset of HTML for coding seems like a potential accessibility problem, which is to say, you'd have to make your documents less semantically rich. "less semantically rich" than what? Web pages? Or less rich than PDFs, which is what he's actually proposing to replace?
- Finnucane 3y agoThan the epub standard as it exists. I guess I don't understand what the advantage here is, really. If you want to make an epub file that works universally, you can do that, within the existing standard. If makers of reading systems and software would actually support the full standard, which they currrently don't. If you don't want to use pdfs, don't use pdfs. pdfs get used for a lot of things they aren't actually very good for.