▲ | ratelimitsteve a day ago | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
>Sometimes you want one, sometimes, the other. This is the part that the top commenter missed. Instead they decided that one format is "nice" and the other, by implication, isn't. I find PDFs a lot easier to keep organized en masse, I like that I can use them on any of my devices and it's easy for me to use them when I'm doing in-depth reading such as an ebook. Doubly so because my ereader also does text to speech and syncs across devices so I can read on my tablet while I'm on the exercise bike and then switch to listening to the same book on my phone with minimal seams and without losing my place. It is, in a word, nice. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
▲ | Aachen 12 hours ago | parent [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
None of that sounds related to the format? - A text to speech engine should work better with the original html structure where it sees bold tags, headings, and full sentences ra- ther than broken-off ones - Keeping PDFs organised, how would that differ from keeping any other filetype organised? I don't understand what difference you, "by implication", attribute to a file ending in .html or .pdf for being able to handle them en masse. If anything, searching across them will be vastly easier for software (self-written or third-party) and more reliable because it's all plain text - Text and audio rendering syncing, I have no experience with but that doesn't sound like it ought to fundamentally work for a display format and not for the source text format. Of course, the software has to have support for this format (and otherwise it's trivial to pdfify a html but vice versa is nearly impossible) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|