For accessibility reasons, arXiv is starting to publish HTML versions of papers. https://info.arxiv.org/about/accessibility_html_papers.html 🧵

#math #papers #openscience #academia #arXiv
@brembs
@lambo

I think this is interesting and welcome, especially on mobile devices. It is not without problems to want to quickly check some fact on your phone, download the PDF, go to landscape mode, find the right location in the paper, zoom in, etc.
1/4

HTML papers for beta testing - arXiv info

The promise would be that in HTML, everything is reformatted to look great on any line length.

But there is a kind of integration attack going on: Once we have the HTML version, why not enhance the paper with things PDF can't do? After all, HTML5 offers limitless possibilities to make the 3D figures interactive, run simulations, have the examples to be toys you can play with, etc.

Once these seemingly harmless new features are there, who would want to go back to the PDF version, which is a
2/4

static, cumbersome and arcane? Once we are there, we will definitely need versioning of publications because if papers become software, they will have bugs and need bug fixes.

I feel very insecure about this future. I am unhappy with how static and old-fashioned it is of us, to stick to this A4-PDF-paper format, for documents which are consumed on laptop and iPhone screens, and it never really fits and scrolling and zooming and whatnot.
3/4

On the other hand, I want to be done with a paper at some point. If publications turn into software, they will just need a lot of maintenance, forever. Maybe it can be solved with open-source culture, maybe future generations will take care of the bug fixing for my papers, but why would they and how would the get credit for this work in an academic system that only rewards new things and not the maintenance?

So what do you think about HTML arXiv papers?

4/4

@tomkalei it's a must. biRxiv has HTML versions since forever (?) And it really annoys me that chemRxiv also only offers PDF. arXiv is not really my place to go, but it's definitely a good decision.
@tomkalei I don't really follow your point about super dynamic HTML pages, HTML versions of journal articles are the norm and they are (unfortunately) all static and not interactive at all.

@tomkalei @buerviper personally I never author PDFs. Too much like dead paper. Presentations on my website are pure HTML and ready for full interactivity using my own open source library:

https://analyticphysics.com
https://paulmasson.github.io/mathcell/docs/

Of course I'm not part of the academic system, so I can implement whatever I feel appropriate. The MathCell library replicates Mathematica's Manipulate command in pure JavaScript, so it runs just by loading the page. Wouldn't have it any other way.

When I make major changes to a page I also note that at the bottom. More detailed tracking of changes is easily implemented with something like GitHub.

Analytic Physics

@paulmasson @tomkalei yeah I wish academic journals would be similar, but publications work a lot differently.

@buerviper @tomkalei thought I'd share one particular page on my website. When I was first reading Barrett O’Neill’s book "The Geometry of Kerr Black Holes" I wanted all of his illustrations to be live and fully interactive. Eventually I put this together:

https://analyticphysics.com/General%20Relativity/Visualizing%20Aspects%20of%20the%20Kerr%20Metric.htm

Now whenever I see a PDF with two or three special cases of a general solution, I kind of cringe. Could never go back to that myself when I can have so much more in an HTML document.

#physics #math #visualization #GeneralRelativity

Visualizing Aspects of the Kerr Metric