To use only the name of an generic font family is one method to exclude all font-file-format Finally this means a lot of systematic research to find out, what goes wrong with the font-files, but with related test files/books one can localise the problem instead of guessing, what could be wrong. EPUB 3 requires from a user-agent to interprete OpenType and WOFF, if a user-agent does not manage them, it has a bug or gap concerning EPUB 3, but if the font-file is corrupted, this needs to be fixed first before someone can be accused to do something wrong. One can create the books manually and understand its content completely to exclude the generating program, for example. It is not necessarily easy to find out, what applies. If this applies, remaining problems are probably related only to the checking program or both your program to generate the book and your user-agents displaying it can If it matters and you add your own font, first one should check, that user-agents supporting theįont format really display the font and others use the generic font family specified as fallback in the CSS file. Users can chose, which font is used, therefore they get, what they like.Īs author you do not have to care about licenses and font-file-formats, if this is sufficient. Because every user-agent is required to have a font for such a generic font family, it is always ensured, that the content/text/glyphs are displayed. CSS recommends anyway to add such generic font family name as final value in the value list of the font-family property as a fallback, even if specific fonts are used. Mhherr - if you don't insist on a specific font as an author, you can simply use the name of aįont-family in CSS like 'serif' or 'sans-serif' or 'monospace'. If a program only tries to embed something from these sources to create for example the EPUB book, one can at least check, that the intended content exists and is accessible for this program. And within an EPUB book one cannot expect, that a user-agent really follows such external links, if they are really intended to be followed. Really look like a meaningful address for FTP - one has to find out, if this is really noted in forĮxample the OPF-file or a CSS-file. Presumably the EPUB validator does not care about licenses, respectively leaves the responsibility for this to the publisher, but this Ingram/Spark tries to care about it.Ī general approach for such bugs without a detailed error description is either to start with minimalistic files and increase complexity, until the bug/problem appears or alternatively one can start with the final, complete version and simplifies this step by step until the problem is gone - with such a method at least one can find out in detail the part of the book, the problem is related to and one reduce the error report to such an organisation to a minimalistic file, that does not contain much more than necessary to create the bug/problem.Īnd if something is encrypted somehow, one can have a test version without encryption to learn, whether the problem is related to encryption or not - and so on, testingĭifferent hypotheses for the source of the problem by removing or adding questionable features.īy the way, something like ' or ' ftp://LIGHTNINGSOURCE' does not Can't you create a test version without included fonts? (Using in CSS only the generic font-families?) Maybe this Ingram/Spark checker cannot identify and check the license of an included font-file?
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |