3 ms·
The original URL should be included somewhere. That said, I don't quite understand the advantage of this solution versus a plain article view (e.g. firefox's b
by stewbrew 9y ago
The original URL should be included somewhere.
That said, I don't quite understand the advantage of this solution versus a plain article view (e.g. firefox's built-in article view or something similar provided by some plugin/service) saved to disk via an PDF printer.
- skygazer 9y agoI've had co-workers share printed articles with me, perhaps because they think I'm more likely to read them than an emailed link. It would have been nicer to read them multi-column, sans ads, headers and nav.
- k1m 9y agoGood point, we'll add original article URL at the bottom. As for the advantages, at the moment FireFox's built-in reader view doesn't produce the kind of output we do. If you're curious, we created a video of the kind of multi-column print layout we're experimenting with here a few years ago. All HTML and CSS: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=854Csokl3QA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=854Csokl3QA So if they did create a more print-friendly output, it'd be closer. But there'd still be that step of you creating the PDF yourself. Our server-side approach allows it to be integrated in other kinds of applications. It also allows us to do things like return a PDF which doesn't include an additional page due to a slight overrun that can be avoided with a minor font size reduction (see my other comment explaining how we try to do that at the moment).