Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Default for Reflowable Content is Spreads; should be Singles #94

Closed
Kathybluefire opened this issue Jul 24, 2014 · 6 comments
Closed

Default for Reflowable Content is Spreads; should be Singles #94

Kathybluefire opened this issue Jul 24, 2014 · 6 comments

Comments

@Kathybluefire
Copy link

After talking with Ric, we agree, that the default for reflowable content should be single pages, not spreads. Especially considering mobile devices, spreads are award when text is large. Authors can specify spreads when appropriate, but for the typical ebook, single pages should be the default.

@danielweck
Copy link
Member

Taken from #96

"This is also a case for Single pages being the default. This file does not behave in the way people read: both columns move down the page concurrently, and we read the first column, then the second. It's very awkward to get the reader to perform that way. You need to read the first column to the bottom, go to the next file, then back to the previous and read the second column. Not so much."

Book to use to test: https://bluefireproductions.box.com/s/kvy491e757ydkob2vqh5
File Name: O_01_Paginated

@danielweck
Copy link
Member

The current behaviour is to view the document using a two-page synthetic spread when the width is greater than the height (landscape aspect ratio), and to switch to single-page view when in portrait mode (which is useful when rotating the display of a mobile phone or tablet device).

On that basis, I disagree with "the default for reflowable content should be single pages, not spreads", because on a typical laptop or tablet landscape display this would result in long horizontal lines of text, which is very difficult to read / scan (this is why "columns" are used in most printed formats to break up the eye scanning distance). Should a user want/need to switch to a wide single page view, they can always do so by setting their user preference via the options dialog. However, I do not think this is an acceptable default.
@rkwright do you agree?

@danielweck
Copy link
Member

@KathyAlley @rkwright
Related issue:
#101

As mentioned here and at the issue above, there are font-size implications in addition to viewport width (because the text line eye-scanning distance is a function of both)

danielweck added a commit that referenced this issue Jul 25, 2014
…and #94 (responsive "page" / "column" width for readable runs / lines of text)
@danielweck
Copy link
Member

@danielweck
Copy link
Member

Note that this issue is addressed in the "textWidthMargins" feature branch, which contains single/double spread switch logic based on "column" width (text line length) rather than just orientation aspect ratio (screen rotation):
https://github.com/readium/readium-js-viewer/tree/feature/textWidthMargins
https://github.com/readium/readium-shared-js/tree/feature/textWidthMargins

@danielweck
Copy link
Member

Kathy, Ric and I had discussions about this, all is right. Closing issue.
(irrespective of new logic in "textWidthMargins" feature branch)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants