Topic on Talk:Reading/Web/PDF Rendering

I am not a tech guy nor a UI specialist but I don't see why WP should have a PDF creation that looks like the printed version of a page and a printable version of a page that doesn't look a printed page. When you have Chrome it gives eventually the same result but not with Firefox, Brave or other browsers. Should the printable version of a page not generate and propose its PDF version automatically?

Moreover, creating human readable books obviously requires specific tools that go beyond a simple PDF rendering per page and the collating them. I would separate these two topics.

@Afernand74 Thanks for your input. I'm not sure I follow what you're saying here, but I'll interpret as best I can and let me know if I got wrong.

1. I think you're saying that our "printable version" link is useless. I agree. Most people know how to print from the browser now, but for those who can't I would like to provide an icon that just starts the browser printing.
2. The same as above goes for the pdf generation...an icon is the most I think we should have. Except for the "old" OCG created rendering, which looks visually different. Most people use the browser and the vast majority of people don't want to think about it.

As to breaking out the conversation, they are tied mostly because they currently rely on the same technology. For this reason, we can't have two conversations that end on different conclusions. Any thoughts on how we can untangle this are most welcome. Another challenge I have is ensuring we are hearing from potential big users like wikibooks and wikiversity...we have posted on their pumps, but haven't heard anything. Just throwing my problems at you now ;)

Hi @Jkatz (WMF). Sorry for being cryptic.I think you grasped most of it ;-) I agree the "printable version" link is useless. It is a pity one cannot selectively format what is being sent to the printer but starting the browser printing will be sufficient for most users. For the pdf generation, a pdf button will do great.

If you implement this two thinks, why not keeping OCG alive exclusively for book creation until a better solution is developed? Why not just remove "book creation" link from the "print/export" section and move to another place? Sometimes, less is more.

Thanks for these thoughts, @Afernand74. I think that both your first option is definitely something we are planning on doing. Though right now we are trying to hone in on what "better" means. If it means books now have tables, but only have 1 column is that "better"? Based on other comments on this talk page it probably is not. As for your second suggestion, that is very interesting and might be a way to keep core users happy and limit the operational support while we figure out a new solution. I and others really do think that books or reading lists (as most users seem to use the tool) is a great feature space that deserves better implementation.