8 ms·
Since the article doesn't link to any example HTML article, here's a random link: https://browse.arxiv.org/html/2312.12451v1 https://browse.arxiv.org/html/2312
by shrimpx 3y ago
Since the article doesn't link to any example HTML article, here's a random link:
https://browse.arxiv.org/html/2312.12451v1 https://browse.arxiv.org/html/2312.12451v1
It's cool that it has a dark mode. Didn't see a toggle but renders in the system mode.
Overall will make arXiv a lot more accessible on mobile.
- burkaman 3y agoAnd here's the PDF of the same paper for comparison: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2312.12451.pdf https://arxiv.org/pdf/2312.12451.pdf
- FredPret 3y agoThe contrast is massive. I'm much more likely to read the html version; that PDF is deeply off-putting in some hard to define way. Maybe it's the two columns, or the font, or the fact that the format doesn't adjust to fit different screen sizes.
- ForkMeOnTinder 3y agoDefinitely the two columns for me. It's super annoying skimming a paper and having to scroll down and back up again in a zig-zag pattern.
- mmis1000 3y agoI think the consuming device matters. A ipad or computer have much wider screen width. One column layout is too wide for them for average people to scan text lines quickly. While it looks perfectly fine on a phone. Two columns layout looks terrible on a smartphone, the text is too tiny to read comfortably. It would probably be even better if you can flip it left and right like a ebook instead of scrolling to allocate the content faster. But current design is good enough IMO. (Compare to reading a pdf on cellphone)
- GoblinSlayer 3y agoTo display two column layout you need a tall screen, now wide. If you display two column layout on a short wide screen, you have to scroll it up and down in zigzag pattern to read one page.
- kjkjadksj 3y agoJust zoom the smartphone into one column. Problem solved.
- mmis1000 3y agoAnd then you will have to scroll both top bottom and left right, a even worst experience.
- GoblinSlayer 3y agoIt's about "One column layout is too wide" - if you zoom, it's not too wide anymore, also smartphones have narrow screen, not wide, and tablets can do that too afaik.
- kjkjadksj 3y agoScrolling like that is not hard in smartphone format imo
- fuck_google 3y ago[dead]
- tobias2014 3y agoThis is very interesting, because for me it's just the opposite. In particular the two column layout is just more readable and approachable for me. The PDF version also allows for a presentation just as the authors intended. I guess it's good that they offer both now.
- kjkjadksj 3y agoThe authors don’t format the pdf, the editor does. Authors probably sent a double spaced word document with figures and tables on another file.
- tonyg 3y agoIn computer science, the usual case is that the author fully formats the paper.
- z2h-a6n 3y agoNot on arXiv (unless I'm much mistaken), which is a preprint server, not a conventional journal. arXiv accepts various flavors of TeX, or PDFs not produced by TeX [0], and automatically produces PDFs and HTML where possible (e.g. if TeX is submitted). In the case of the example paper under discussion, the authors submitted TeX with PDF figures [1], and the PDF version of the paper was produced by arXiv. The formatting was mainly set by using REVTeX, which is a set of macros for LaTeX intended for American Physical Society journals. [0] https://info.arxiv.org/help/submit/index.html#formats-for-text-of-submission https://info.arxiv.org/help/submit/index.html#formats-for-te... [1] https://arxiv.org/format/2312.12451 https://arxiv.org/format/2312.12451
- smartmic 3y agoFWIW, I recently learned that it is also possible to produce nice PDF papers with GNU roff (groff), have a look at this example: https://github.com/SudarsonNantha/LinuxConfigs/blob/master/.config/groff/Examples/paper/paper.pdf https://github.com/SudarsonNantha/LinuxConfigs/blob/master/....
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- kjkjadksj 3y agoIf you read a lot of papers in your line of work you will quickly appreciate the two columns and justification.
- FredPret 3y agoAdmittedly, I don't read research papers. But with HTML, surely the choice between one or two columns is a checkbox away.
- IlliOnato 3y agoWhich checkbox? I cannot find anything relevant in any of the 3 browsers I use (Vivialdi, Firefox, Chrome). Would really appreciate this option. A quick search gave some apparently unmaintained browser extensions, and it's it.
- jabroni_salad 3y agoOnly problem is jagoffs like me who need the text to be bigger. On PDFs you now get to experience a horizontal scrollbar. HTML has text reflow and I can set the line length by resizing the window. I'm willing to make a lot of sacrifices for that experience.
- z2h-a6n 3y agoFor what it's worth, two column layouts are very common in the physical sciences, or at least in physics which I'm more familliar with. I have a feeling that the reason is at least partly to save page space when using displayed math (e.g. equations that are formatted in a break between blocks of text), which use the full text width (i.e. the width of one column) to display what may be much less than half a page wide.
- FredPret 3y agoIt makes sense - for paper. But pixels are infinite - HTML is far better for screen display, which is how people read things nowadays. The extra column next to the one I'm reading introduces a lot of visual noise, and the content is hard enough as it is. I'm sure physicists have all gotten used to it, but it certainly trips me up.
- nyssos 3y ago> The extra column next to the one I'm reading introduces a lot of visual noise Papers are generally not read start to finish in one go: there's lots of rereading and jumping back and forth between key parts, and anything that moves them further apart makes this harder.
- FredPret 3y agoAh, that makes more sense. I imagined scientists just reading the whole thing start-to-finish. I still think a flexible layout is best. If you like multi-columns and have a wide screen, why not display 12 columns next to each other? With PDF this is not possible. With HTML the content can in principle be sliced and diced how you like it.
- fuck_google 3y agoOne can also view PDF pages side by side, which works pretty well with a 4K monitor.
- arp242 3y ago
- mastazi 3y agoI wonder if perhaps it's a generational thing, I prefer the PDF because it reminds me of printed paper, which is what I used growing up. (For reference: I am at the end of Gen X, people 3-4 years younger than me are considered Millennials).
- Blikkentrekker 3y agoQuite so. The font annoys me. This is one of the reasons I hate PDF and why I believe these things should be controlled by the person reading it, not the publisher. I do not much care what font the auctor finds pleasant to read, but what I find pleasant to read, and this font isn't it, and neither are the colors.
- wruza 3y agoSeconded. I can (will) actually just read referenced papers now instead of hesitating to either get a headache or stay uninformed. Defaults and UX rule the world. It’s unfortunate that $subj wasn’t a thing for so long and probably scared millions of curious minds from material. It is so important.
- lemper 3y agodefo concur. will read the html version when on mobile from now on.
- cuteboy19 3y agoIt feels quite standard for a paper
- znpy 3y agoI prefer the pdf version, mostly. I can annotate it on the side both in print and digitally with my iPad. I can also invert colors in pdf readers to get some kind of “dark mode” easily. The html version is wasting a lot of space on the right side and the color scheme is awful (dark grey on a brown background, seriously? How is that any better? Edit: disabling dark mode yields a better reading experience wrt color scheme). Also, somehow links to references make another http request and have no backlink? The html version could make sense if it had more dynamic functionalities: change fonts/line spacing, toggle color schemes, maybe a mini map or some other navigational tool? Also, some kind of support for highlighting and/or annotating?