Marvin page numbering and images

[cedhax]

In Marvin 3, a page is defined to be 250 words of text. But how many pages or fraction of a page is considered occupied by an image element?

[Faterson]

Marvin's "page" numbering is a travesty and should simply be abandoned, in my opinion. Or, at the very least, it should be made purely optional for fans of such arbitrary, pulled-out-of-thin-air, uncalled-for inventions. I started a dedicated thread for this issue.

I'm interested in seeing real page numbers – that is, the number of times I need to flip the page/screen on my current reading device until I get to the end of the book. That is already how Marvin treats pages in chapters. That is how printed books work. What could be more reasonable to request? Is that too much to ask for?

If this reasonable request cannot be obliged, then at least, please, let us disable the display of those fake "page" numbers in Marvin 3. It really makes my blood boil whenever I see them, because they are just misleading. Currently, you can't disable the display of those fake "pages" without also disabling the display of other data I consider crucial. So, the feature that Kris promised us – the ability to customize the structure of our headers and footers via templates with placeholders – can't be introduced soon enough.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Faterson

Marvin's "page" numbering is a travesty and should simply be abandoned, in my opinion. Or, at the very least, it should be made purely optional for fans of such arbitrary, pulled-out-of-thin-air, uncalled-for inventions. I started a dedicated thread for this issue.

I'm interested in seeing real page numbers – that is, the number of times I need to flip the page/screen on my current reading device until I get to the end of the book. That is already how Marvin treats pages in chapters. That is how printed books work. What could be more reasonable to request? Is that too much to ask for?

If this reasonable request cannot be obliged, then at least, please, let us disable the display of those fake "page" numbers in Marvin 3. It really makes my blood boil whenever I see them, because they are just misleading. Currently, you can't disable the display of those fake "pages" without also disabling the display of other data I consider crucial. So, the feature that Kris promised us – the ability to customize the structure of our headers and footers via templates with placeholders – can't be introduced soon enough.

Sorry, but the number of screens is not a real page number. In fact, it's less real then ADE style page numbers. Page numbers should NOT change if you change any settings.

[Faterson]

Just your opinion, Jon, and while I respect that you have that opinion, I strongly disagree.

My opinion is exactly the reverse of yours: page numbers must change whenever you switch to a different reading device or change your font type/size, page margin etc. settings (because in practical terms, that amounts to switching to a different reading device).

You argue for another brand of fake pages – ADE. I have nothing against Kris giving you that option. But, please don't enforce those fake pages for all Marvin users. Not ADE fake pages, and not Marvin fake pages, either.

Give us actual page flips as page counts. They are the perfect and 100% logical counterpart to flipping pages in a printed book. The same book also has different numbers of pages in various printed editions, based on the font-type, font-size, paper-size, etc., used in this or that particular printed edition. Why should electronic books behave any differently in this regard?

Actual page flips as page counts = that is already how Marvin treats pages in chapters, and how Marvin has always treated pages in chapters, back in Marvin 2 and Marvin 1, too, and rightfully so. Why was no one "outraged" by that then? Why this sudden fascination for Marvin's completely unnecessary invention of fake pages? Why are you OK with "pages in chapter" being page flips, but demand for "pages in book" to be something completely different and arbitrary?

We've already discussed all of this in that other page-numbering thread, so we're just rehashing it here. But, the concern voiced by Cedhax in this thread will be addressed competently if Marvin treats "pages in book" in the same way that it has always treated "pages in chapter": if an image fits on the current screen, you're still on the same "page". If you need to flip the page to view the image, then it's another page (and Marvin can calculate all such necessary page flips in advance, in order to arrive at the total number of pages in the book). Issue resolved!

[eschwartz]

A pox on all fake page numbers.
Few things other than Kindle have the honesty to be honest.

The only page numbers should come from Page-map or PageList.

[Faterson]

I strongly disagree with you as well, eschwartz.

Actual screen flips are genuine page numbers in the electronic environment. That is the basic principle I'm arguing for. Not recognizing that is, to me, a fallacy – succumbing to illusions, and calling those illusions "pages".

I don't get the obsession of you guys for a book to have the same number of pages on as different reading devices as a 4-inch iPhone and a 13-inch iPad. Come on??? How could that ever be? Of course if you have a tiny reading device, a book must have many more pages on it than if you have a large reading device. That's just common sense to me.

What you or Jon are talking about is an admirable concept, perhaps, but they are not pages. No, sir, they are not – only geeks could call a "page" something that does not change at all, or changes by 2, 3, or 4, after you flip to a new screen once while reading a book on your iPad or iPhone.

If you know me, eschwartz, you know that I abhor Apple software. It's just unbearably dumb to me. But here, in this page-count matter, iBooks (of all e-readers!) stands head and shoulders above Marvin. Isn't that embarrassing for Marvin? iBooks treats page numbering exactly right: the total page numbers reflect the size of your reading device. And another related aspect where iBooks is clearly superior over Marvin, is the Table of Contents: when you open it in iBooks, it shows you also the page number where each chapter in the book begins. So, at a single glance, you can see how many times you need to flip the page (on your current reading device, which is all that counts for non-geeks) to get through a chapter. That clarity is impossible to achieve with ADE's fake pages or with Marvin's current fake pages.

Once again: I have nothing against ADE pages, or page-maps, or Marvin's current arbitrary scheme, etc., if they are merely options for Marvin users. But Marvin should definitely also give us what I would call the most natural, the no. 1 reasonable option: page flips = page counts. iBooks chose this approach, and it was – for a change – perfectly justified in doing so.

[eschwartz]

No. Just... no.

Call it screenfuls, or whatever. Use "locations". Anything.

Just get rid of this legacy fake "page" thing.
It is good for nothing but academic citations (another legacy-encrusted area). And those need to be real.


As for me, my Kindle does "Time left to read", which IMHO trumps all other methods.

...

Now go trumpet your own bias, but keep in mind that no one will actually change their opinion...

[Faterson]

Originally Posted by eschwartz

Call it screenfuls, or whatever. Use "locations". Anything.

Quite the reverse, eschwartz. Please consult the word "page" in any good dictionary. The description nicely fits our modern-day electronic devices. Yes, flipping to a new screen is turning a page in the electronic environment.

It is you and Jon who should stop calling a "page" something that clearly is not a page. I also detest Amazon software (again, too dumb, just like Apple software), but as you yourself indicated, eschwartz, Kindle is being honest here: it called its original scheme "locations". (It was just rather unfortunately chosen; regular folks hate dealing with 4-digit or even 5-digit "locations", and that's where the backlash came from.)

Now what you and Jon are arguing for are also locations – just different ones compared to Kindle's locations. Also different from the completely unnecessary current scheme in Marvin. But they are not pages.

Originally Posted by eschwartz

As for me, my Kindle does "Time left to read", which IMHO trumps all other methods.

Absolutely not. For you, perhaps, but for me, it would be an absurd metric. Any book I can think of consists of passages that are easier to read, and such that it takes more time to read and digest. So, any "time left to read" metric is, to me, completely arbitrary and therefore imprecise. If it serves your purposes, though, then good for you.

Originally Posted by eschwartz

keep in mind that no one will actually change their opinion...

Oh, I'm not that pessimistic. I fully believe in the ability of rational discussion to change people's minds.

[eschwartz]

And this discussion is as irrational and illusionary as any other. So it is NOT pessimism.

[Faterson]

I don't see anything "irrational and illusionary" about this discussion. Not my side of it, that is.

Yes, I'm mystified as to why you, Jon, Kris or others would insist to call a "page" something that (for non-geeks) clearly is not a page... but that is really something for you folks to consider.

I'm not trying to monopolize the term "page" for my interpretation of it. Nope – if Marvin gives us various page-numbering options, and ADE is one of them, so that Jon can select it, I'm perfectly fine with that. But Marvin should also offer us the logical and natural page-numbering option such as that available in iBooks. There is no getting around that. Before you give us arbitrary numbering schemes, give us the natural stuff first, please.

You've got to admit that the situation is pretty bad for Marvin if I need to introduce iBooks (!) as a shining example to follow.

[eschwartz]

"logical and natural" is your subjective opinion.

'nuff said.

[cedhax]

Originally Posted by Faterson

...
We've already discussed all of this in that other page-numbering thread, so we're just rehashing it here. But, the concern voiced by Cedhax in this thread will be addressed competently if Marvin treats "pages in book" in the same way that it has always treated "pages in chapter": if an image fits on the current screen, you're still on the same "page".
...

Yes. But since that's not the case now with Marvin 3's newly invented page numbering scheme, I just want to know how images are counted as "pages" as conceived by kguil.

Since kguil is active in this forum, we should not need to do the unnecessary work to reverse engineer his definition of pages.

@kguil - Can you please answer my original question?

[JKenP]

The only thing that seems a solution here for those with their shorts in a knot is to quit ebooks and buy paper books whose numbering is in stone/ink. There is no perfect way to number pages that can change count/words with a font adjustment.

The only time I've ever felt a need to know numbers is with reference books and I do tend to have paper versions of those.

[eschwartz]

As for me, I don't care so much but I do feel that "page" has way too much historical paper baggage, and only serves to confuse people further (by implying there is some sort of mythical paper correspondence).

I am in favor of any solution that stops people from making that mistake and then complaining about the so-called flaws in the implementation.

A page by any other name references just as well and doesn't set people off in the process.
(Well, except for some people who will complain about anything and everything if it doesn't match their own personal preferences to a "T". )

...

It is also very fun to whenever these bikesheds come up.

[Turtle91]

Originally Posted by eschwartz

(Well, except for some people who will complain about anything and everything if it doesn't match their own personal preferences to a "T". )

...

It is also very fun to whenever these bikesheds come up.

You'll never win an argument against someone who ignores everyone else's opinion as "stupid" or "nonsensical" and imposes their own opinion as the only logical way of doing something..... so away!!

Just beware...people like that will take every as a personal attack and claim that they are only trying to "help" while making a complete horses-hind-side out of themselves.