Thread: Epubcheck 3
View Single Post
Old 01-08-2013, 02:15 PM   #23
Hitch
Bookmaker & Cat Slave
Hitch ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Hitch ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Hitch ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Hitch ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Hitch ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Hitch ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Hitch ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Hitch ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Hitch ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Hitch ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Hitch ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Hitch's Avatar
 
Posts: 4,335
Karma: 40564843
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Device: K2, iPad, KFire, PPW, Voyage, and NookColor. 2 Droid, 1 Win8 ePUB rdrs
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dillinquent View Post
Thankyou Dale, that is what I've been trying to tell everyone here.

Passing epubcheck validation isn't optional, it is a requirement of the IDPF standard.
Yes, thanks, I think everyone here knows that. The problem is, for those of us making commercial books for companies OTHER than Apple, that many of the aggregators/distributors are not even using 2, (Lulu, OD, Inscribe Digital...), which means that books that pass the current 3 will fail.

I have not found anything other than the itunes.plist file, thus far, that shows up on the IDPF ePUBcheck 3.0 versus 2.0. (Of course, I sort of assume that if I've been stupid enough to open an ePUB on iBooks through iTunes--which one shouldn't do for numerous good reasons--I'd remember that the plist file was going to be there--but that's just me.) I have found a giant list of tripe that gets pinged on Apple's intake, which is unrelated to ePUBcheck. That's not the same thing.

And it seems it does not matter, as user_none has explained that we shan't be having ePUBcheck itself in Sigil any time soon. {shrug}. I double-validate our books, of course, as I stated earlier, using whichever ePUBcheck is required for that specific client, for that specific book, to ensure it passes intake (1.1 or 1.2) and the current ePUBcheck as well. It's time-consuming, but as nobody--nobody--is paying attention to the "IDPF standards," that seems to be what we're all stuck with.

Hitch
Hitch is offline   Reply With Quote
 
http://www.mobileread.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2373046&postcount=23
www.mobileread.com
crawl=CC-MAIN-2016-30
11910
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:YR2GNLXV7PGLVJUNNJGBRBXI66AZYYZ6
<urn:uuid:3663b8b9-2e69-46fa-9b6f-3721550554db>
2016-07-28T06:56:27Z
66.55.128.228
sha1:BX22MQBJGHGWQSUQQK3N5E3APY3DQRDV
<urn:uuid:8e100112-a474-41ef-8ee2-6bd1940307f2>
http://www.mobileread.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2373046&postcount=23
length
response
<urn:uuid:e8436765-60c5-4e27-b9cd-5946777f5edb>
robots: classic
hostname: ip-10-185-27-174.ec2.internal
software: Nutch 1.6 (CC)/CC WarcExport 1.0
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2016-30
operator: CommonCrawl Admin
description: Wide crawl of the web for July 2016
publisher: CommonCrawl
format: WARC File Format 1.0
conformsTo: http://bibnum.bnf.fr/WARC/WARC_ISO_28500_version1_latestdraft.pdf