My place, NZ

## book.js

I mentioned in an earlier post that the movable type of Gutenberg’s time has become realtime, in a very real sense each book is typeset as we read it. Content is dynamically re-flowed for each device depending on display dimensions and individualised settings. Since ebooks are web pages, browsers have come to play a central role in digital e-readers.
What is interesting here, is that the browser can also reflow content into fixed page formats such as PDF which means that the browser is on its way to becoming the typesetting engine for print. book.js demonstrates nicely the role of the browser as print typesetting engine.book.js is a JavaScript library that you can use to turn a web page into a PDF formatted for printing as a book. Take a web page, add the Javascript, and you will see the page transformed into a paginated book complete with page breaks, margins, page numbers, table of contents, front matter, headers and so on. When you print that page, you have a book-formatted PDF ready to print. It’s that simple.

It brings us closer to in-browser print design and a step closer to the demise of desktop publishing. Although book.js is in an alpha form, it is a clear demonstration that the browser is fast becoming the new environment for print design.

That is an enormous leap, one that not only means print design environments can be developed using browser-based technology, which will surely lead to enormous innovation, but it radically changes the process of design. The design of books and paper products enters a networked environment. This will enable more possibilities for collaborative design and bring print production into the workflow of online content production. There will be no need to exit browser-based environments to take content from source to final output. This means there is no need to juggle multiple sources for different stages of production, there can be efficiency gains through integrated workflow, and, most interestingly, content production and design can occur simultaneously…

It is also important to realise that these same technologies, book.js and others that will follow it, can make the same things possible for ebook production. Flowing text into PDF for a paper book, or into e-reader screen display dimensions, is the same thing. This enables synchronous in-browser design and production on a single source for multiple output formats.

book.js is Open Source, developed originally by and for Booktype, but the team is looking to collaborate with whoever would like to push this code base further. It is at the alpha stage and a lot of work still needs to be done, so please consider jumping in, improving the code and contributing back into the public repository.

book.js demo and information can be found here .  Note: This is strictly for the geeks to try as it requires the latest version of Chrome; see the demo information.

Originally posted on O’Reilly, 29 October 2012
http://toc.oreilly.com/2012/10/bookjs-turns-your-browser-into-a-print-typesetting-engine.html

## The New New Typography

In the 1920s and 1930s in Europe, there was a movement known as the New Typography. It was a movement that rejected traditional type set in symmetrical columns and instead treated the printer’s block as a blank canvas to be explored in its entirety. The calling card of the movement was type arranged in harmonious and beautiful asymmetric compositions. In the past two years, there has been another slow-breaking wave of typographical exploration. The printer’s block is now HTML, and CSS and JavaScript are fast becoming the new tools of the typographer – not just for the web but for ebooks and for print, and not just for printed books, but for all printed material.

### Browser as typesetting machine

The change of the book’s basic carrier medium from paper to HTML (the stuff web pages are made of) has meant many changes to what we might still call typesetting. Kindle and other e-ink devices actually move ink on a display screen to form words, sentences and paragraphs. The moveable type of Gutenberg’s time has become real time – in a very real sense, each book is typeset as we read it. Content is dynamically re-flowed for each device, depending on display dimensions and individualised settings to aid readability. Moving type in ‘read time’ marks a significant paradigm shift from moveable type systems, including digital moveable type manipulated by desktop publishing software, to flowable typesetting. We are leaving behind moveable type for flowable type.

The engine for reflowing a page in real time is something we have seen before. It is the job of the browser. And, since ebooks are webpages, browsers have come to play a central role in digital e-readers. In the case of the iPad, the iBook reader is actually a fully featured browser engine, Webkit, the very same technology behind the Chrome and Safari browsers. Browsers are the typesetting machines for ebooks.

What is interesting here, is that the browser can also reflow content into fixed page formats such as PDF, which means that the browser is becoming the typesetting engine for print. CSS and Javascript are the print design tools of our immediate future and the vast majority of innovations in this area are based on Open Source and Open Standards.

### The power of CSS and JavaScript

CSS is the set of rules followed by the browser in placing type, images and other elements on a webpage and styling those elements. Typical rules define where an image is placed in relationship to text, the font used, the font size, background colour of the page, and the maximum width of an image, and so on. While designed originally for the exclusive application to webpages, the CSS Working Group responsible for overseeing the development and direction of CSS, anticipated the intersection of the book and the web some time ago. In the latest drafts of the CSS standards, new additions are almost entirely focused on typography and page control. As a consequence, this area is starting to blossom. In particular, the CSS Generated Content for Paged Media Module specification is astonishing for its reframing of flowable text into a fixed page. Cross reference and footnote controls, not needed on the web, are among many book-like structure controls being addressed by CSS. Table of contents creation, figure annotations, page references, page numbers, margin controls, page size, and more, are all included. The definition of these rules precedes their adoption in browsers, however they are being included in browser engines, notably Webkit, at a very fast pace.

Coincidently, there has recently been an explosion in interest in improving browser typography primarily for the better design of websites. Although these advances have not been made with book production in mind, these advances can be inherited by the browser for typesetting both electronic and paper books. Of interest is the sharp rise in the websites offering tips on CSS typography, an associated explosion of the available web fonts, and some very interesting JavaScript libraries.

JavaScript is the programming language of the web and it can be used to create dynamic content or manipulate objects on a webpage in ways CSS cannot, or cannot yet. Of particular interest is kerning.js, inspired by the previously available lettering.js library. These code libraries allow you to change each letter individually in a paragraph or heading and control the spacing between letters (called ‘kerning’). Kerning is essential for printed books, and ebooks, but missing from browsers for a very long time. colorfont.js is another JavaScript library which enables dual toned glyphs, and the amazing typeset.js emulates the sophisticated TeX line spacing algorithms developed by Donald Knuth.

Even the layout of musical notation and guitar tablature (which were never effectively mechanised with Gutenberg’s moveable type and were handwritten into books for many decades after the printing press came into the world) have come into focus with another JavaScript library, VexFlow. With libraries like these, it is apparent that JavaScript, the programming language of the browser, has a future with typography, and that JavaScript is fast becoming the lingua franca for all typesetting.

There is a lot of fuel in these developments and, interestingly, most of it is coming from outside the traditional print and publishing industry. It could be said that these industries, built upon the printing press, have lost sight of their very foundation. Instead, the IT industry is taking hold on a very deep level.

Apple and Google are behind the development of Webkit – the rendering engine behind iBooks, Safari and Chrome – which makes a lot of these typesetting innovations possible. Apple utilises these typographical features not just in its browser, but in the development of its iBook reader – the ebook reader on iPad which is itself based on Webkit. Google also fuels these innovations for many reasons other than the browser – better typography in Google Docs being one of them. We can expect the momentum to build and it is possible to say with some confidence that the browser, together with CSS and JavaScript, is to become the most important typesetting engine of our time as it is fast becoming the typesetting mechanism for digital and paper books and the web.

### Ease and efficiencies

The implications of this succession by the browser are enormous and possibly not yet fully realised. At publishing industry conferences and other book-focused forums, the attention has largely been on the ebook’s affect on distribution, and on e-readers and the demise of the so-called bricks-and-mortar book stores. The biggest effects, however, are elsewhere, ‘bubbling under’ in the recasting of the browser as a typesetting engine, and with it the slow realisation that the technical ecosystem surrounding book production can be replaced by tools for producing webpages.

We are beginning to turn our attention to the tools for making webpages, to make books, and this, it turns out, is much easier than with desktop word processing and publishing software. Additionally due to recent developments, all of this, as it turns out, can also be used to design print (more on in-browser print production in a future post). Book production once again is becoming faster and cheaper and is on its way to achieving another leap of magical efficiency.

The future of book production right now is exploding all around us. These pieces of the puzzle are coming together and coming together fast. We can almost watch in real time as the necessary mechanics get filled in by new release candidates of major browsers and searching online for ‘out of the blue’ small innovations such as JavaScript typography controls. It is getting easier and easier to make books in the browser and consequently there has never been a time when it has been this easy to make books of all kinds.

Ease of production is where it all started for Gutenberg and it is starting again for us. If you believe Gutenberg’s efficiencies changed society forever, then what affect will the new-new typesetting engines have? It’s a giddy question. Making books in the browser will have an enormous impact on society as a whole, and just like the printing press, it will not revolutionise the old order, but create a new one.

Originally published on O’Reilly website, 18 Oct 2012 http://toc.oreilly.com/2012/10/the-new-new-typography.html

## What’s wrong with WYSIWYG

The current WYSIWYG paradigm has been inadequate for a long time and we need to update and replace it. Using a WYSIWYG editor is pokey and horrible. Producing text this way feels like trying to write a letter while it’s still in the envelope. These kinds of editors are not an extension of yourself, they are cumbersome hindrances to getting a job done.

Apart from huge user experience issues, the WYSIWYG editor has some big technical issues, starting with the fact that the WYSIWYG editor is not ‘part of the page,’ it is instead its own internally nested world. In essence, it is an emulator that, through JavaScript, reproduces the rendering of HTML. However, as a walled emulated garden it is hard to operate on the objects in the garden using standard JavaScript libraries and CSS. All interactions must be mediated by the editor. The ‘walled garden’ has little to do with the rest of the page. It offers a window through which you can edit text, but it does not offer you the ability to act on other objects on the page or have other objects act on it.

The new generation of HTML5 editors have taken a large step forward, not because they integrate HTML5, as such, but because they act on the elements in the page directly. That allows ‘the page’ to be the editing environment which in turn opens up the possibility for the content to be represented in a variety of forms/views. By changing the CSS of the page, we can have the same content represented as a multi-column editing environment (useful for newspaper layout), as a ‘google docs type’ clean editing interface (see demo below), a semantic layout for highlighting paragraphs and other structural elements (important for academics) as well as other possibilities….

Additionally, it is possible to apply other javascript libraries to the page, including annotation software such as Annotate It or typographical libraries such as lettering.js. This opens up an enormous amount of possibilities for any use case to be extended by custom or existing third party JavaScript libraries.

It is also possible to consider creating CSS snippets and applying them dynamically using the editor. This is in effect turns the editor into a design interface, which will open the path for in-browser design of various media.

Lastly, WYSIWYG editors, while marvellous in their day, have had their day. They feel too pokey and ‘old school’. Largely due to the success of Google Docs users no longer want to poke around in a tiny WYSIWYG editor. They want large clean interfaces for content production.

The above screen shot is taken from the semi-functional demo at http://data.flossmanuals.net/mercury/index.html (all demos work only in Chrome for now).

In brief summary, essential problems of the current WYSIWYG world are:

1. it is not easily possible to enable JavaScript libraries to act upon the objects in the editor
2. representing the content in context is difficult
3. the content is not part of a page so additional functionality like (non- intrusive) annotations cannot be added to content
4. dynamic rendering of content retrieved from the server is hard to achieve
5. dynamic creation of content is hard to achieve
6. inclusion of nested JavaScripts is hard to achieve
7. they look ‘pokey’ and old school
8. synchronous editing is possible but hard to achieve
9. users want to see the content they are making in a much cleaner and clearer ‘fullpage’ way
10. some users want semantic views
11. some users want design views
12. all users must be able to edit the content (designers, editors, content creators, etc) and do what they need from the same view

Online book production has special needs such as the ability to display the content as it might appear in the output, annotations, draft view etc.

## The Ideal Editor

A short list of starting list of features for a new editor might look something like this:

1. harmonise edit, draft, proof, design features into one view
2. live chat
3. short messages which also support ostatus API (which is built on Twitter spec)
4. send to renderers from within the editor
5. ability to switch on and off third party JS libs
6. apply CSS templates to content
7. create CSS snippets
9. share snippets and templates
10. dynamic snippet rendering
11. live template swapping including semantic layout and ‘output’ view
12. synchronous editing
13. per ‘chunk’ notes

Many of these features are relatively easy to achieve, others will take some careful thought and planning.

## The Dream features

1. backend hook up to git
2. versioning of content especially for different outputs (A4 vs A5 pages, html, epub etc)

## Where to start

We need to develop with an editor in the hand. The current batch of html editors does pretty well but we need to choose one which has a good support community and a good feature set. Currently, there is just one option – Mercury editor. It currently has a new home page (less than 2 weeks old), and a thriving community.

Some demos if what could be done with Mercury in a book production environment:

http://data.flossmanuals.net/mercury/index_semantics.html

http://data.flossmanuals.net/mercury/index.html

http://data.flossmanuals.net/mercury/index_hyphen.html

http://data.flossmanuals.net/mercury/index_prettify.html

If you want some more convincing,  try this math editor using Mercury and MathJax…  http://data.flossmanuals.net/mercury/index_math.html
Try typing $f(x)$ into the window to see how it works

Or try this to see how AnnotateIt works in this environment.

## Annotate Me

Annotation is an interesting world. It has survived the many changes in book technologies until, interestingly enough, the net. It’s not that we have never needed it, it’s that we haven’t been able to do a good job of it. There have been some good attempts – CommentPress was one by Bob Stein and the Future of the Book Institute. Comment Press was useful, I installed it myself and used it – it was built on top of WordPress. But Bob and crew learned their lessons and improved the idea with the yet-to-be released Social Book.

On top of that has been Purple Numbers (by Douglas Engelbart – you know! the guy that invented the mouse!) , and the code known as Marginalia, and there have been three of four attempts using Jquery to get this right. While Marginalia did get included into Moodle, which is pretty cool, it didn’t really take off and none of the other attempts got anywhere.

I think that might be about to change with a very nice relatively new project called AnnotateIt. It is built on top of Jquery and is built by the crew behind the Open Knowledge Foundation, which in turn has been supported extensively by the Shuttleworth Foundation.

It’s good stuff. Very simple to use as either a free and centralised service, or you can establish your own annotation server. I am trialling it at the moment wíth FLOSS Manuals. You can create an account at http://annotateit.org/

And then try it on FLOSS Manuals. For example:

http://booki.flossmanuals.net/a-webpage-is-a-book/_draft/

Looking forward to trying it out. Any feedback on both the book and the annotation tool is very much welcomed.

## Re-use

Xerography—every man’s brainpicker—heralds the times of instant publishing. Anybody can now become both author and publisher. Take any books on any subject and custom-make your own book by simply xeroxing a chapter from this one, a chapter from that one—instant steal!"   —Marshall McLuhan, The Medium is the MESSAGE

This vision from McLuhan is of an analogue future. A future of analogue media and analogue networks. It would take digital media to realize his vision. Webpages being the networked document of our time enable the kind of instant steal that McLuhan foresaw. With free content licenses and simple tools for importing content from other books or other libraries, we can borrow enormous amounts of rich information to help us build the books we want.

In a recent Book Sprint on Basic Internet Security, 9 chapters from 3 existing manuals were reused – that was 15,000 words that we did not have to create afresh. Of course the material needed some work to fit the new context, but it was still a substantial time saver and extended the scope of the book well beyond what we could have produced in the time we had.

This was really quite amazing for me to see. The idea of reusing content was envisioned from the moment FLOSS Manuals was built, but, 3 years later, this was the first real case of substantial re-use. It takes time to build up the materials to make sense of re-use in this way, however, after waiting 3 years, I took a great deal of pleasure in seeing it happen for the first time.

Re-use is not just a time saver, however, there are many other exciting possibilities enabled by re-use. Re-use is also about translation and recontextualisation. Re-use is about updating books and improving them. Re-use is about taking content and making it work in your language. Re-use is about enabling anyone to get your content to their audience and in the form they need it. Re-use is also about allowing you to re-use your own work, since often publishers hold the copyright and do not permit authors to update, re-use, or improve their own work.

Re-use helps you make the books you want to make faster and get them to the people you want to have them in a form that suits them best.

Re-use, despite its attractive opportunities, is an issue that existing publishing models are going to find very hard to work with. This is because full engagement with re-use leads to the federation of content and the inevitable possibility that anyone can publish any book you have made. Taking a book, not changing a word, marketing it and selling it, is re-use. It is going to be difficult for publishers to agree to this consequence while tapping into the many opportunities for new business models around this idea. But that is not our problem. We want books to be freely re-used and we should find the most open channels to do that.

The core of re-use is primarily about extending the usefulness and life of a book.

One of the differences between a book and a newspaper, is that we expect longevity from a book1. We expect a book to have value beyond the date printed at the top of the page.

The web offers enormous opportunity for the life of a book to be increased further than it is now. The Open Educational Resources (OER) movement is alive to this idea. They imagine you could take a mathematics text book and update it for the following year’s curriculum, or combine it with another book to better suit your students’ needs. Or correct it if you found a mistake, or translate it. Major advantages in all sectors, not just education, can be attained by keeping books alive.

Books currently have too long a life as a static object. They have become too static as a result of Gutenberg’s invention. ‘Static-ness’ is now a part of a book’s genetics. ‘Readers’ find it even hard to pick up a pen and write notes in the margin of books. Margin notes are frowned upon by libraries. We have forgotten that notes like this (‘marginalia’) were once very common. When paper was hard to come by, the margin notes were often where books were written.

So books did not always have a static genetic code. They once were places for lively discourse and for book production itself.

Interestingly, there is a kind of slow historical regression taking place because of digitally-networked media. There are a few projects (notably commentpress2and the yet to be released Social Book by Bob Stein, and some ebook readers) that enable types of margin notes in digital books. In the case of Commentpress these notes are the point of the book – a place to start discourse (almost literally) around the book.

However, we still cannot seem to embrace changing the book itself.  It is one thing to allow ourselves to leave margin notes in this new era of digital documents, since we know the source will not be affected. We can easily spray comments around the book as the book itself stays intact. Can’t we allow ourselves to change the book too?

Books have always been changed over time. Ben Fry did a very nice visualisation3 of the changes Darwin made to his Origin of the Species over 6 editions. It is a nice work showing substantial changes, including the addition of an entire new section in the last edition. The Origin of Species was an evolving thesis and the book was kept alive over the period of Darwin’s life. The book’s ’life’ ended with Darwin’s.

But why must a book die with the author? Why can’t anyone contribute to a book to keep it alive, even during the life of its author? We feel somehow that this is breaking some kind of moral law (as well as copyright law). Forgetting copyright for now – why not improve the original? Why can’t we take a book, any book, and improve it, perhaps even while the author is still alive? Why is that idea so difficult for us to engage with?

Leaving copyright licensing aside for the moment  – one part of the puzzle involves the overly rarefied respect for the authoritative version. The version born from the author. We (you or I) are not that author and so we cannot know the author’s intent with all its nuances. We should not meddle with a work because we would be breaking our unspoken contract to preserve the author’s intent. It would not be considered an appropriate thing to do. We do not have the authority to do it. The authority is inherent in the author alone – so much so, that the role of the author to the book is analogue to the role of ‘god’ to its creation. The author is the creator.

Sound like I am overstating the cultural value of the author? In William Golding’s Lord of the Flies, the children use Piggy’s glasses as a magnifying glass to start a fire. However Piggy was short-sighted and hence starting fires with his glasses would be impossible as they are concave, and concave lenses disperse light4 . You cannot start a fire with concave lenses. Would we allow anyone to alter the book to correct this rather trivial fact? No. No, because the book is Golding’s world and in Golding’s world concave lenses start fires. Golding is the creator. He has the authority to change his creation and we do not.

I think that is a very deeply ingrained principle.

For this reason, many recoil in horror with the prospect of changing great works of art. We are in some way tampering with the mind of the creator – a kind of god. However, we must remember that if we change a book, we change nothing in the original. Books, unlike paintings, are not one-of-a-kind pieces. That is precisely why the age of Gutenberg has such an impact – books could be duplicated. So when we change a book (I’m not talking about historical paper artifacts, just the abstracted contents) we don’t destroy anything, and this is particularly true in the digital age. In fact, the digital age gives us more tools to take care of the provenance of a work. Hence we can easily have Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austen and Pride and Prejudice and Zombies by Jane Austin and Sethe Grahame-Smith5 .

How to we develop a culture where it is OK to change a book? Free Licenses are meant to change that but in my experience it is still difficult to get people to take hold of explicit free license clauses that enable derivative works and improve a work. They feel they lack the mandate to change. Many people still ask if they can improve a free/open book work even though the mandate to change a work is loudly passed on and articulated by ‘the creators’ to anyone.

In fact, it is difficult to pass on the mandate to change. It doesn’t help that large projects like Wikipedia are working against this mandate. Wikis and Wikipedia have managed to introduce ideas of participative knowledge creation, but as Lawerence Liang6  has argued, Wikipedia is possibly trying to establish itself as an authoritative knowledge base which also has the effect of revoking the mandate to chang,e as has been experienced by many new contributors that find their edits reversed.

I think we will leave this all behind in time, but it’s going to be a long time.

All books can be improved – even the most sacrosanct literary works. However we live with the notion of the authority of the creator. The only thing that can change that, is to take the rights afforded to us by free licenses and experience and value the possibilities open to us if we act differently.

We need living books, and under copyright we have to fight very hard to keep them alive. The first step it to take someone else’s book and improve it.

1. Daniel James^
2. http://www.futureofthebook.org/commentpress/ ^
3. http://benfry.com/traces/^
4. http://homepage.mac.com/cbakken/obookshelf/vision.html^
5. http://www.quirkbooks.com/book/pride-and-prejudice-and-zombies^
6. http://vimeo.com/10750350^