21–30 of 138 posts
Nice! PDF is the worst format I can think of to present papers. Especially for reading on mobile this will be of great help.
PDF is usually bad, of course, on small screens, unless the publisher makes special versions.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I was looking for a way to turn my (soon-to-be-defended) PhD thesis into an epub, and investigated the various LaTeX2Html converters. I was pretty disappointed when I realized that all of them are terrible and have no hope of handling my manuscript. My current solution is to create a rendering of my thesis in a5 format. :/ This look quite a bit better, so here is the question: what do you not support at the moment?
A lot of things. LaTeX and its packages have so much surface area. Our approach so far is to just make the papers that we read readable. That probably covers the 20% of LaTeX features that 80% of people use. Here is the broken stuff we are keeping track of: https://github.com/arxiv-vanity/engrafo/issues (feel free to add to it!)
I would think that panflute would allow for more readable code, which helps whendealing with all the corner cases and rough edges of latex.
We were frustrated by the experience of reading machine learning papers on screens (particularly phones/tablets). There are lots of good tools for authoring HTML papers (Distill, Authorea, etc) but nothing that deals with the vast number of PDF papers that already exist. So, we built Arxiv Vanity: a site that renders Arxiv papers as web pages. It’s still pretty janky, but for the papers that do render correctly, the…
[0] https://dmaitre.phyip3.dur.ac.uk/NPP/notes/ [1] https://github.com/JBorrow/latex-pandoc-preprocessor
I tried it on this one: https://www.arxiv-vanity.com/papers/1702.03277/
Some commands don't work (\textsl, \rotatebox, ...) and the thank you footnote is incorporated into the title, but otherwise very readable!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A lot of things. LaTeX and its packages have so much surface area. Our approach so far is to just make the papers that we read readable. That probably covers the 20% of LaTeX features that 80% of people use. Here is the broken stuff we are keeping track of: https://github.com/arxiv-vanity/engrafo/issues (feel free to add to it!)
Is there a reason for relying on pandocfilters instead of on Panflute [1]? I would think that panflute would allow for more readable code, which helps whendealing with all the corner cases and rough edges of latex. [1] https://github.com/sergiocorreia/panflute
Edit to clarify: If people want to use or develop a broken sort-of-PDF viewer, that’s fine. However, if someone searches for a paper of mine, I would like them to only find the version where I at least had a chance to see that it renders correctly and is complete. In particular, I do not want to be "responsible" for broken rendering on random third-party websites. This website actually operating illegally does not make me more inclined to support it.
For instance, the paper [2] appears to be quite readable on mobile, and clicking/tapping on a reference such as (8.1) leads you to equation (8.1) as you would expect.
The auto-generation of Arxiv-Vanity is really nice, maybe it would be easy to add the LatexML output too?
[1]: http://www.albany.edu/~hammond/demos/Html5/arXiv/lxmlexample...
[2]: http://www.albany.edu/~hammond/demos/Html5/arXiv/LaTeXML/110...
We were frustrated by the experience of reading machine learning papers on screens (particularly phones/tablets). There are lots of good tools for authoring HTML papers (Distill, Authorea, etc) but nothing that deals with the vast number of PDF papers that already exist. So, we built Arxiv Vanity: a site that renders Arxiv papers as web pages. It’s still pretty janky, but for the papers that do render correctly, the…