Thoughts on my minimalist site?

[Ian Rastall]

Since all the other eBook sites are busy and complicated, I've turned my
own (http://bookstacks.org/) into just one page. A simple HTML page that
links to the directory that holds all the PDFs. It seems to me like an
elegant solution, because the list of PDFs is automatically created by
Apache. (I'm in the process of giving them more meaningful names, and
all I have to do is rename via FTP. No need for any HTML editing.)

I have a few questions, though:

1. Is this secure?
2. Is it clear to an outsider how the site works?
3. Is the minimalist look off-putting?

Hope all are well.

 

[dorayme]

Since all the other eBook sites are busy and complicated, I've turned my
own (http://bookstacks.org/) into just one page. A simple HTML page that
links to the directory that holds all the PDFs. It seems to me like an
elegant solution, because the list of PDFs is automatically created by
Apache. (I'm in the process of giving them more meaningful names, and
all I have to do is rename via FTP. No need for any HTML editing.)

I have a few questions, though:

1. Is this secure?

About as secure as giving any other link to your offerings from your
server.

2. Is it clear to an outsider how the site works?

All they need to know seems simple enough. But it is hard to
understand the mind of the man on the Clapham omnibus, no one here
takes that bus.

3. Is the minimalist look off-putting?

Is eating just an apple for lunch off putting to colleagues? Perhaps
your minimalism gives a sense you are not the least interested in
making a nice website. Which is fine, I just mention this because you
talk of elegance which seems misplaced on something so simple. If
someone was to ponder about your choices of design, they might think a
lack of confidence or skill or a maybe little laziness and/or lack of
interest in design are behind your choices.

I don't the least mind your choice, have already sent the link to a
friend with a new Kindle!

 

[Ian Rastall]

On 1/19/2013 3:33 AM, dorayme wrote:> Perhaps

your minimalism gives a sense you are not the least interested in
making a nice website. Which is fine, I just mention this because you
talk of elegance which seems misplaced on something so simple. If
someone was to ponder about your choices of design, they might think a
lack of confidence or skill or a maybe little laziness and/or lack of
interest in design are behind your choices.

It does look that way. I just had to think about the relative value of
adding in, say, a graphic, or a sidebar. Why would I need them? There is
only one purpose to the site, and that's to get the PDFs from the server
to the user. ... I thought of it as elegant in terms of solving a
problem in the simplest way.

However, it's true that it does sort of look like nuclear winter. I
suppose adding some CSS, and leaving out any images, would still keep
the load time to (practically) nothing.

I don't the least mind your choice, have already sent the link to a
friend with a new Kindle!

Thank you! I have to admit, I don't mind it either. But I don't want to
drive users away who think they've come across amateur hour. They
probably aren't going to look at the source and go, "Ooh! Efficient!"

Thanks for the insight. It's appreciated.

 

[Ian Rastall]

What it needs is a blue sky
background with wispy clouds and maybe one corner can depict a slice of
beach (cliché I know) and a dramatic gif slapping a giant 'relax' meme
blinking in the foreground.

OK I'm joking about the gif, and maybe if I viewed your site on a small
device I'd appreciate the design but my screen is 1600 by 900

For background image I'd prefer to see something like this:
http://syque.com/ds/pix/maldives_07/island_blue1_800.jpg
but with more sky and less island. Elements of the graphic should also
appear on the pdfs.

I'm definitely not going for a branded look. I barely mention the site
at all in the files themselves. I just want the books to look good.

It does look pretty good on my Kindle Fire. I set the max-width to be
slightly wider than the Kindle (when vertical), so it always defaults to
the width of the viewing area. My monitor is 1920x1080, though, and I
agree. There is a ton of wasted space.

I'm thinking that adding any images is going to slow things down too
much. I love how fast it is. You're right, though. There has to be some
style, or it just doesn't look peaceful. I think CSS might work.

I guess I picked-and-chose from your advice, but thank you.

 

[(PeteCresswell)]

Per Ian Rastall:

(http://bookstacks.org/)

2. Is it clear to an outsider how the site works?

Perfectly clear to me.

3. Is the minimalist look off-putting?

Maybe a matter of taste.

I like it a lot: No BS, gets right to the point.

Hopefully, as the collection grows, all titles will still be on
one humongous page so the user can search easily using the
browser's Search facility.

 

[Mike Duffy]

Since all the other eBook sites are busy and complicated, I've turned my
own (http://bookstacks.org/) into just one page.

It would be easy for you to modify the site to actually be just one page
instead of the two it is currently.

1. Is this secure?

Just as secure as other web-sites.

2. Is it clear to an outsider how the site works?
Yes.

3. Is the minimalist look off-putting?

It might be to some. But Lynx users and small-screen users will like it.

Take a look at my site. This was done more or less for fun, and to learn
the basic HTML and Javascript techniques. Some have told me it is not
"flashy" enough, but I despise any sort of distracting animation.

Also, my ISP only allows us 5 Mb (this is not a typo) for their free
service.

 

[Ben Bacarisse]

Since all the other eBook sites are busy and complicated, I've turned
my own (http://bookstacks.org/) into just one page. A simple HTML page
that links to the directory that holds all the PDFs. It seems to me
like an elegant solution, because the list of PDFs is automatically
created by Apache. (I'm in the process of giving them more meaningful
names, and all I have to do is rename via FTP. No need for any HTML
editing.)

I have a few questions, though:

1. Is this secure?

Yes, unless there is a serious configuration problem at the server (but
that's as likely to affect any sort of site).

2. Is it clear to an outsider how the site works?

I think so, but I'm an insider!

3. Is the minimalist look off-putting?

I think it is a little. I like the idea of clean and simple, but a
directory listing may be one step too far -- mainly because the file
names can't be as expressive as a link. For example, poor old Balzac is
missing his acute (that goes twice for Baha'u'llah) and the ASCII dash
don't look brilliant as a separator. The server's file system might
support a wider range of characters, but even then a little formatting
would, in my option, help. You could avoid the repetition of the author
with just a little processing.

If it were mine, I'd have the listing generated for the directory by,
say, a PHP script. That way you keep the "just upload" advantage.
You'd have to define a format for the names, so the script could split
off the author from the title, but I think that would be worth doing in
any case.

If the server can't include accents, a trick I've used before is to have
a .txt file with the same base name as the .pdf file that contains the
name you would like to have used. The script uses the PDF file name
unless there is a matching .txt file in which case it uses the contents
of that file.

BTW, I find 60ems worth of text a little wide for comfortable reading.
I don't know if this is just me. I wonder if there is a generally
agreed value? (I use 45em).

 

[dorayme]

BTW, I find 60ems worth of text a little wide for comfortable reading.
I don't know if this is just me. I wonder if there is a generally
agreed value? (I use 45em).

Under 30 is most comfortable, a bit more is not necessarily so bad if
there are good reasons aside from ease of reading the text itself.

 

[dorayme]

nntp-05.dc1.easynews.com:
....

It might be to some. But Lynx users and small-screen users will like it.

Take a look at my site.

er... no, never mind.

 

[Mike Duffy]

(e-mail address removed):

er... no, never mind.

Ahh, so you`ve seen it beforeI take it.

 

[Ian Rastall]

Under 30 is most comfortable, a bit more is not necessarily so bad if
there are good reasons aside from ease of reading the text itself.

Yes, I was trying to get the max-width slightly wider than the width of
my Kindle Fire (in vertical mode). I figured tablets in general had the
same dimensions (roughly).

Thank you for all the insights. It's been a long day, so I just got back
here. Hope all are well.

 

[Jukka K. Korpela]

Since all the other eBook sites are busy and complicated, I've turned my
own (http://bookstacks.org/) into just one page.

This sounds familiar. I think I have commented on your material. You are
distributing an English translation of a work of Dostoyevsky without
indicating the translator. This is barbaric, and probably a copyright
infringement too, as it does not look like an old translation.

So I think it would be immoral to suggest any improvements.

 

[Ian Rastall]

I think it would be immoral to suggest any improvements.

In that case, Jukka, I have no reason to kow-tow. I will just be honest.
You have been making an ass out of yourself on the Internet for as long
as I've been here, which is more than ten years. As is the case on any
of the computer-related ng's, those who can offer advice or help can get
away with pretty much anything, in terms of rudeness and crass, ugly
behavior. But it reflects *extremely* poorly on your character. Has it
ever occurred to you that, on a newsgroup devoted to one of the most
popular topics on the Internet, there has been surprisingly little
traffic? Every potential long-term poster who comes by stands a good
chance of running up against your arrogant, foolish attitude.

I have no idea what you think you're doing here, other than blowing off
steam. But that does have an effect, and if you don't care about all the
negative feelings you've sown over the years, consider at least what it
reaps you. And no, I don't really hang out here, so I can afford to be
on your shit list, or ... to be honest, anyone's. It's just amazing to
me how people with high intellects can feel superior to others, when
that very ugly air they assume has turned them into fools.

 

[Jukka K. Korpela]

In that case, Jukka, I have no reason to kow-tow.

When this (followed by strong personal accusations) is your reaction to
a note about apparent copyright infringement on your pages, it more or
less confirms the suspicions. It is fair now to assume that all
translated works there are being distributed illegally.

 

[Jonathan N. Little]

When this (followed by strong personal accusations) is your reaction to
a note about apparent copyright infringement on your pages, it more or
less confirms the suspicions. It is fair now to assume that all
translated works there are being distributed illegally.

A quick scan of the list seems that all the books are out of copyright.
For the book in question

Crime and Punishment
Fyodor Dostoyevsky
Translated By Constance Garnett

Is in the Gutenberg project and probably okay to freely distribute, if
he got the source from Gutenberg I thing you are obligated to include
their copyright info.

<http://www.gutenberg.org/files/2554/2554-h/2554-h.htm>

That said, it is important to verify copyrights and whether or not
something is in the public domain before you "publish" it on your site.
Rule of thumb, if *you* did not create it, you *must* check *before* you
can use it. To the OP if all these works are in the public domain you
should put a notice to such somewhere on the site.