Live data from Hacker News

Readable: A more readable version of "readability"

readable.tastefulwords.com

11–20 of 93 posts

Re: Readable: A more readable version of "readability"

#11
Comparison of the new versions of Readable and Readability, here:

http://www.filterjoe.com/2011/04/11/web-page-reformatting-se...

Hightlights:

The new Readability takes 6-12 seconds to reformat a page, vs. less than 2 seconds for both the new readable and the old Readability.

New Readability has more features, including Instapaper-like sharing for those who pay.

It is possible to use the old Readability, for those who prefer it.

Re: Readable: A more readable version of "readability"

#12
post #6

So the source is licensed CC-Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike, but there's no public repository or support? That's a curious approach.

The source code isn't in any repository because I don't work with repositories. And, if I were to list a specific version of the code, it would become slightly obsolete in less than a week -- as I am continually tweaking Readable's text-parsing algorithm. You can find an always up-do-date version of the code here: http://readable-static.tastefulwords.com/_r/bulk.js

Re: Readable: A more readable version of "readability"

#13

Comparison of the new versions of Readable and Readability, here: http://www.filterjoe.com/2011/04/11/web-page-reformatting-se... Hightlights: The new Readability takes 6-12 seconds to reformat a page, vs. less than 2 seconds for both the new readable and the old Readability. New Readability has more features, including Instapaper-like sharing for those who pay. It is possible to use the old Readability, for those wh…

Readability 2.0 choosing to load and reformat the pages via their server instead of doing it in place in browser really slows it down.

Re: Readable: A more readable version of "readability"

#14
post #4

"Legally, Readable's source is under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike license." Erm... Why? Correct me if I'm wrong, but Creative Commons wasn't made for code. There are plenty (even too many) open source licenses to choose from. Why not one of those? EDIT: Yup, using cc for source code is not recommended: http://wiki.creativecommons.org/FAQ#Can_I_use_a_Creative_Com...

Honestly, I browsed around for less then ten minutes, before deciding on Creative Commons for the code -- and I did so only because I previously saw source-code under various Creative Commons licenses. I did not know that it wasn't recommended; thanks for letting me know. I'll be sure to study the issue more thoroughly and re-license the code.

Re: Readable: A more readable version of "readability"

#15

It's been quite a small bit of time, now, but IIRC I had some direct correspondence with the author/creator of Readable, and he was a quite agreeable chap. I realize this doesn't speak to the technical merits, but the exchange left me feeling more comfortable about using his product. (Leaving aside the role of advertising and the need to support sites, a separate but not insignificant concern.) Here's the old URL/sit…

Glad I made an impression; and thanks for the compliment. I'm actually about the same in real life, too.

Don't worry: Readable won't ever have advertising -- the most I'm looking for is something like a very small "Sponsored By XXX" banner, at the bottom -- if any cool company will ever be interested that is.

The new site will be redesigned -- and it will be a lot better when JavaScript is turned off. But I really don't recommend you use the old site any more, as that still runs the old version of the application -- which is way worse, in terms of performance.

I hope you're still using Readable, and that it's still helping you read the web more comfortably.

Re: Readable: A more readable version of "readability"

#16
post #8

It's nice that you can customize it because the default - serif - font isn't that readable, atleast not on win7+opera. Also, I think they need to update the default font families because calibri and other post Vista fonts are as commonly used as Arial & co.

If you have any suggestions, I'm very open to them. As a matter of fact, if you're up to it, you can design your very own theme -- I'll let you name it, and give you full credit. Or, if you just have a couple of quick suggestions, feel free to list them here, or get in touch (http://readable.tastefulwords.com/about-and-contact/).

Re: Readable: A more readable version of "readability"

#17

I hope this doesn't track what I'm reading unlike the new readability.

Yup; all text processing is done in the browser.

URLs are tracked, though -- they would be tracked in my server logs, even if I didn't do anything specific to track them.

But they are intentionally tracked -- and a percentage of them are run through an automated Readable test, every day, so that I can see, on average, how often Readable gets things wrong.

Re: Readable: A more readable version of "readability"

#18
A great improvement over Readability! It's bookmarklet has been replaced, at least on my bookmark bar: it's faster, has increased customization options and justification, and is open-source... Add hyphenation to that mix and you've got a solid ten out of ten service.

(Justification and hyphenation were the two features I always wanted Readability to have, and it always seemed odd to me that something branded "readability" lacked them...)

In the FAQ you answer to whether Readable is open-source: "no" in the sense that the source isn't on display somewhere. Not to split hairs here, but that sentence is incredibly confusing; what does having your code "on display" have to do with being open-source?

Re: Readable: A more readable version of "readability"

#19
I'm Readable's author.

If anyone has any suggestions for improvements, or even feature requests, I'm all ears.

I'm not promising I'll implement them; but I'll definitely listen and consider them carefully.

P.S. jbm, thanks a lot for posting this -- I've tried posting Readable to HC myself (twice), but it didn't stick.

Re: Readable: A more readable version of "readability"

#20

A great improvement over Readability! It's bookmarklet has been replaced, at least on my bookmark bar: it's faster, has increased customization options and justification, and is open-source... Add hyphenation to that mix and you've got a solid ten out of ten service. (Justification and hyphenation were the two features I always wanted Readability to have, and it always seemed odd to me that something branded "readabi…

Hyphenation is a planned feature. As are hanging (typographic) quotation marks.

So hang tight: more cool stuff is coming -- I just have to find more hours in the day.

Post reply on HN