Easy to be dismissive, but IP violations can cost a large company hundreds of millions.
IP lawyers are more important to many companies than their software developers.
If you doubt that, check to see who gets paid more...
This is blatantly wrong.
In a perfect world, RMSDK wouldn't exist in the first place and Adobe would have gone bankrupt and become history at least 10 years ago.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughts_on_Flash
https://web.archive.org/web/20170615060422/https://www.apple...
I’ve switched to kobos (Clara HD) and I’ve had to for years. It’s chugging along (had to 3d print a replacement power button a couple months ago), I can run koreader no problem and use calibre with the kobo plugin. And the default rendering engine in kobo’s firmware does actually typeset the text: no ragged edges!
I'm very grateful for this information and it explains why I've avoided epub opting for pdf over epub as my reader software is old.
I'm am very much on the side of supporting backwards compatibility. It reminds me of the times the M$ used to upgrade their doc standards ... where if one hadn't upgraded, well bad luck.
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.
PDFs certainly can suck, more often those that will only work with abode's software and other viewers I've tried can not.
PDF is not nearly as pleasant under the hood. It's down right lovecraftian.
https://b3n.org/psd-is-not-my-favourite-file-format/
or in the code:
PDFs can be painful as well, more often it's then using abode's pdf viewer, but it's far less common for me. There was a time many years ago when I understood PDF structures better, back when I chose to manually edit and fix a couple of malformed PDFs.
Straight HTML, edit anything everywhere. Super slick.
The epub standard doesn't say what version of CSS must be supported. There were no guarantees modern CSS would work so I wouldn't call the renderer broken.
> illegal values, or values with illegal parts, are treated as if the declaration weren't there at all
So a conforming implementation would ignore that max-width property declaration, not raise an error.
And those earlier versions of ePub which defined a required subset of given CSS standards? The forwards-compatible parsing rules were part of their subset.
Ignore != Fatal error