Maybe there's something wrong with my setup, but their 2nd example flashed on/off very quickly about 15 times, really quite a disturbing bug. Anyone else get that?
edit: others who confirm are using chrome, I'm using chrome on mac so it looks like latest chrome on all platforms are affected.
I had a look at the problem and it seems to be related to the page transition animations (the amount of flicker seems corresponds to the animation steps.) I've created a ticket for this issue: https://github.com/Treesaver/treesaver/issues/issue/148
No issues in FF 3.6.13 on Win7, or in IE 9.0.7930.16406 (beta).
In Chome 8.0.552.237 (also Win7) I got nothing on loading, but it did do the flashing thing five times on page three. Haven't been able to replicate it since on any page, though.
I didn't notice any unusual flickering in Chrome 10 on Ubuntu. Maybe it's been fixed in the 14 hours since you first saw the problem?
Also, re: 9ec4c12949a4f3 (since I can't reply directly): I prefer continuously flowing text to paginated layouts. One of the things I like about the web is that I can choose the size of the chunks I read, rather than having a page layout defined for me. However, I do agree that an HTML-based paginated layout would be preferable to PDF for many things.
Nice work so far, but from the demos it's missing an important layout feature commonly seen in magazines. Spanning an image or text insert half way between two columns and having the text of the columns flow around it.
I would love to support this, but we don't right now due to performance reasons.
Dirty laundry: Each paragraph is laid out and measured only once (at a specific column width), then the metrics are all cached. Layout is then performed by dumping paragraphs into each column and just clipping whatever overflows.
The advantage is that this process is very fast, even on a mobile device. Try resizing a window and notice how quick the re-layout is.
The downside is that certain layouts are not possible right now, such as the example you've shown.
As browsers get faster, we'd like to start doing our own line layout, which would let us do far more here (with a performance penalty, unfortunately).
Actually it runs better on my android than in stock Chrome on a reasonable powerful workstation.
I get flicker, slow response and no visible animation between pages in Chrome. Seeing this I expected the worst when trying it on my phone, but there it actually runs quite fine.
I'm using Chrome on the latest Ubuntu. It's not a performance problem at all, the transitions are smooth and beautiful (and on this laptop, they had better be!)
The issue seems to be that the transition occurs only at certain scroll points on the page, and there is zero feedback where those are - so it's scroll, scroll, scroll, and suddenly, bam transition to the next page. It doesn't help that the intervals between the pages seem to be ridiculously long.
Unfortunately some mice/trackpads output a stream of scroll events. There is a limiter here to prevent unintentionally streaming all the way through a publication. Thanks for your feedback, maybe we can adjust the limiter a little.
For anyone who is excited about Treesaver and wants to start working with it full-time, Nomad Editions (Treesaver client) are looking for a developer proficient in JS/CSS/HTML.
I can honestly say, I have not been this excited about a project (or its potential uses) in a _long_ time.
I'm now weighing up potential back-ends to turn this thing into a database-driven publishing framework, rather than a file-based one. Am I crazy, or has anyone else considered (or already acted upon) this?
I love great layout and I think this is impressively done. However, shuffling through pages somehow felt like more work to me than scrolling the same type of content on a webpage. I think that's because you can't really accelerate to skim. Am I alone in that thinking?
Looks nice but sliding pages back and forth is really jerky on a iPad.
Interesting project through, especially for slate devices for which the navigation is pretty natural.
> Great find. But, I have seen Google doing similar thing using HTML5 entirely.
"HTML5 entirely" doesn't really mean much, for example my website uses mostly HTML 4.01, but is HTML5 as well (since it's mostly backwards compatible).
eg. If you're using <div> tags then you're using HTML5.
edit: others who confirm are using chrome, I'm using chrome on mac so it looks like latest chrome on all platforms are affected.