Comments on: The future of EPUB? A first look at the EPUB 3.1 Editor’s draft http://blog.kbresearch.nl/2016/03/10/the-future-of-epub-a-first-look-at-the-epub-3-1-editors-draft/ Research at the National Library of the Netherlands Fri, 16 Jun 2017 13:42:50 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=4.4.2 By: Johan van der Knijff http://blog.kbresearch.nl/2016/03/10/the-future-of-epub-a-first-look-at-the-epub-3-1-editors-draft/#comment-83 Fri, 11 Mar 2016 13:33:10 +0000 http://blog.kbresearch.nl/?p=1666#comment-83 Thanks for getting back to this Matt. It didn’t escape my attention that the draft is intentionally provocative in places, and I agree this is an excellent way to poke people for feedback. I also like the use of Github issues for the review process, this makes everything really transparent while at the same time keeping the barriers for participating low. In an earlier draft of my blog post I actually mentioned these things in the final section, but that part of the blog didn’t make the final cut (I originally aimed for a 1000 word piece and went way over that!). The NCX sticks out as one of the biggies to me, so I’m curious about the outcome of that.

]]> By: Matt Garrish http://blog.kbresearch.nl/2016/03/10/the-future-of-epub-a-first-look-at-the-epub-3-1-editors-draft/#comment-82 Fri, 11 Mar 2016 03:16:38 +0000 http://blog.kbresearch.nl/?p=1666#comment-82 I’d just note that you don’t have to take my word on support in reading systems. If you go to epubtest.org, you can check support for a variety of features. You’ll find a lot of red in the fallback features, for example: http://epubtest.org/testsuite/epub3/feature/fallbacks/

And the aggressiveness for the first draft was to gauge what is actually being used, not to impose the removals. The feedback received has been very helpful, and a variety of changes are in the works. Reviewing the NCX removal is on tomorrow’s agenda.

]]>