Editing 2791: Bookshelf Sorting

Jump to: navigation, search

Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.

The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision Your text
Line 10: Line 10:
  
 
==Explanation==
 
==Explanation==
Some people like to sort their bookshelves by the visible color of the book's spine, for example by hue to create a rainbow effect. This is pleasing to the eye, but may be unhelpful when [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AYxmPHLU9oA trying to find a specific book]. Literary enthusiasts (AKA "Book People") frequently dislike this system, because it emphasizes appearance at the expense of making books easy to find. On a philosophical level, treating books as decorations, rather than reading material, upsets many purists.  "Book people" are more likely to have a practical system for arranging their books, either by category, genre, title, author name, or some combination of those.  For a large library, a more rigorous organizational scheme such as the {{w|Dewey Decimal Classification}} might be used.
+
{{incomplete|Created by a BOOKSHELF SORTED THE NORMAL WAY. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
  
Unfortunately, [[Randall]] has found a ''much'' worse method of book organization - instead of sorting the books as discrete units, he has sorted their individual ''pages'' by number. This would require physically separating each book into its individual pages, and then organizing them into groups by page number. This effectively destroys every book, and requires anyone trying to read them to laboriously find each individual page (among many pages of the same number), and then replace it in the correct space after reading. Adding a new book would require individually placing potentially hundreds of pages. Where pages are not numbered, finding their place would be nearly impossible.
+
Some people like to sort their bookshelves by the visible color of the book's spine, for example by hue to create a rainbow effect. This is pleasing to the eye, but unhelpful when [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AYxmPHLU9oA trying to find a specific book]. For literary enthusiasts (AKA "Book People"), this arrangement could be seen as annoying, as they would like to be able to find specific books when they need them, and would more likely sort them by the author's last name, or by a more rigorous organizational scheme such as the {{w|Dewey Decimal Classification}}.
  
He doesn't denote whether he's using any particular sub-method to sort the pages within each page number, and if so, whether this is consistent per book (e.g. alphabetically by the book title), or does each page number sort independently?  If the latter (e.g. each group of pages of a particular number is sorted by the first word or words on that page, similar to what is described in the title text), it would be especially difficult to reunite all the pages of a book as each page would be in a different location relative to the other pages.
+
Unfortunately, [[Randall]] has found a ''much'' worse method of book organization - instead of sorting the books as discrete units, he has sorted their individual ''pages'' by number. This would require physically dissecting each book into its individual pages, and then organizing them into groups by page number. This organization method has a number of significant drawbacks. Firstly, it would be rather time-consuming to take each book apart. Adding a book to the shelf would also be extremely inefficient, as Randall would have to locate the correct group to insert each page into. Since books can be hundreds of pages long, there could easily be hundreds of page groups on the shelf. The reverse operation - taking a book from the shelf - would also now be significantly more difficult since one would have to locate all of the book's individual pages - if the pages have no identifying marker to indicate which book they originally came from, it may even be impossible, especially since no secondary sorting has been specified, so, for example page 1 of a book could appear early in the group of page 1s, while page 2 of the same book could appear towards the end of the group of page 2s. In practice, though, Randall appears to have sorted secondarily by book, since there seem to be repeating patterns in the size of the pages.
  
From the picture, Randall's system appears to work by absolute physical page count, including the front and rear covers as 'pages'. All the front covers are on the left side, then the first internal leaf of each book (counted as the second page), then the second internal leaf, etc. This produces repeating patterns of taller and shorter loose-leaf pages, echoing the proportions of each cover, having gathered together a page of the same position in each different book. The back covers are mixed in to whatever group falls after the last internal leaf from the same book, and so are intermixed with pages from longer books. The left-most front cover matches the right-most back cover, the second front cover matches the 2nd-to-last back cover, etc. with the last of the front covers matching the first of the back covers. At the end, there are only the last pages of the longest book left, now all uniform in size, and its rear cover.  
+
Taking books apart also effectively destroys the book, losing all of the physical benefits of having pages bound as a single unit, such as portability and durability. Without their protective cover, the pages would be more susceptible to damage, loss, or disruptions such as drafts. It would also reduce the resale value of the book.
  
From the number of repeated page patterns, it can be determined that the shortest (inner-most) book contains approximately 28 pages, the next shortest book has about 30, the next around 32, the next around 40, etc. It gets harder to tell as the number of pages in each group gets fewer and fewer. In total Randall's bookshelf contains 11 books.
+
It should be noted that the term "page" has an ambiguous meaning when referring to physical pages - "page" can refer both to the numbered page, and to the sheet of paper that the page is printed on. For books, this distinction is important as most books print on both sides of the paper - thus, a single sheet actually comprises ''two'' numbered pages. This is significant to Randall's sorting scheme, as he will need a mechanism to decide which of the numbered pages on each sheet will be the one that he sorts by (unless he is slicing every sheet in half, which would be immensely difficult and even more destructive).
  
The caption claims that "book people" get way angrier at this system, likely because it involves physically destroying books, rendering them almost unreadable. People with a strong affinity for books are often upset at volumes being treated with such disrespect.  
+
All the front covers are on the left side, being effectively the sheet that contains pages 1 and 2, then all the pages 3 and 4, the pages 5 and 6, etcetera, with the back covers mixed in depending on the length of the (now-dismembered) book. Sorting by color has no practical use (beyond possibly that of making an aesthetic appearance), but this distribution of books, makes them useless in all situations and makes for an erratic display potentially susceptible to disordering knocks and drafts.  
  
In the title text Randall claims he sorts his bookshelf alphabetically, but by the first '''sentence'''. He describes this as "the normal way", even though the typical practice is to sort books either by title or author.
+
There are a lot of different-sized front covers on the left side of the shelf (meaning they start with low numbers on the left). Progressing rightward, there are then repeating patterns of taller and shorter loose-leaf pages, having gathered together each a page of the same number from a different book, tracking the proportions of each cover.
 +
After a while, the first back cover is sorted in, as the shortest book's page-count runs out, and then additional runs of pages (less those of each 'finished' book) and end-covers as necessary. At the end, there are only the last pages of the longest book left, now all uniformly in size, and its rear cover. These are either books left without any un-numbered {{w|Book design#Front matter|front matter}} (also the corresponding back matter) or the sorting and collating goes by absolute page count, not by the numbers printed on pages.
  
Sorting by first line was, in fact, a common sorting method before books had titles, known as {{w|Incipit}}. In modern times, however, that method is wildly obsolete, as books are almost always identified by titles, few people memorize the opening lines of their books, and a film titled ''{{w|The Hobbit|In a hole in the ground there lived a hobbit}}'' would not receive any funding.{{Citation needed}} However, {{w|papal encyclicals}} are still named after their first words, and thus would be sorted after their first sentence. For example, the encyclical titled ''{{w|Quanta Cura}}'' begins with "''Quanta cura'' ac pastorali vigilantia Romani Pontifices Prædecessores Nostri, exsequentes [...]".
+
The covers matches in reverse so the longest book has the first cover and thus also the last. the second longest books cover is number two and second last etc. If this should be used to give an indication the longest books page 1 would be first and the shortest books page 1 would be last. So it the shortest book has for instance 200 pages, then its back cover would be the last of those with number 200 so the the longest books page 201 would come right after that books back cover.  
  
In somewhat similar fashion, the 114 chapters of the {{w|Quran}} are roughly sorted by their length. American church hymnals list hymns by relatively meaningless numbers, but then index them by tune name, text title, first line and meter.
+
The caption claims that this is a way of sorting that "book people" hate, even more so than sorting by color of the cover/spine. It is not clear if the spine part is thrown away or just not visible, maybe being sorted towards the wall. This would make it a sort of antithesis to color sorting, not only is it not sorted by color, but the spines that usually define the color sorting are either to the back or fully removed. It might be the intent to have "the absolute opposite" of color sorting and follow this idea ad absurdum.
  
Some books do have very well-known first lines, so sorting by first line could be used to demonstrate a level of literary sophistication on the part of the bookshelf owner, but could hardly be considered "normal".
+
In the title text Randall begins by saying that he of course sorts his bookshelf alphabetically, like book people, but then he states that he sorts books by first '''sentence''' instead of the book author or book title. This is just as impractical, for most purposes of finding, as sorting by color as people then cannot find a book they haven't read (and remembered the first sentence). But at least it doesn't destroy the books and can also be accomplished by a quick glance inside each book (which bibliophiles should certainly enjoy, if it does not distract them from the task at hand) rather than having to pay much attention to exactly how you shuffle and collate many loose-leafs. You can use something like a simple {{w|merge sort}} to arrange the shelf from scratch, or do a {{w|binary search algorithm|binary search}} to find where to insert individual new books.
 
 
Other pop culture references to sorting by first sentence occur in the Good Omens TV show season 2 episode 2, where the archangel Gabriel, while suffering from amnesia, reorganizes the books in the bookshop alphabetically by first sentence to pass the time.
 
  
 
==Transcript==
 
==Transcript==

Please note that all contributions to explain xkcd may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see explain xkcd:Copyrights for details). Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!

To protect the wiki against automated edit spam, we kindly ask you to solve the following CAPTCHA:

Cancel | Editing help (opens in new window)