3 ms·
To be clear, ADE’s behaviour is not conforming to any version of the standards it claims to implement. If it had been, it would reject that specific max-width p
by gsnedders 4mo ago
To be clear, ADE’s behaviour is not conforming to any version of the standards it claims to implement. If it had been, it would reject that specific max-width property declaration as having an invalid value and ignore it, not reject the entire document: every single version of CSS has required that forwards-compatible behaviour.
PDF is not somehow immune to this either — a non-conforming implementation could similarly break what are meant to be forward-compatible extension points by raising an error on an unknown stream or object instead of (as required by the standard) ignoring it.
- anenefan 4mo agoSo if I understand correctly a struggling epub viewer or ADE should skip css that it considers malformed - which means the reason my viewers have considered a epub to be not able to be viewed / corrupt / whatever it is for some other reason than more recent / current css implementation. PDFs certainly can suck, more often those that will only work with abode's software and other viewers I've tried can not.
- gsnedders 4mo agoWhile plausible, I would suspect it’s more likely you’ve just run into bugs than forwards-compatible error behaviour — most ePubs don’t get anywhere near actually interesting CSS!