gmane.editors.lyx.devel

Re: Instructions for: Credits, Blanket-permission and I18n (translations)

Christian Ridderström — 2008-07-24T18:15:22

Thanks, I did wonder about those. I deleted the remainder of those two files from the directory /home/lyx/www/www-user/farm/cookbook/LyX/ /Christian

Re: Instructions for: Credits, Blanket-permission and I18n (translations)

Jürgen Spitzmüller — 2008-07-24T17:38:05

That was me. Thanks. I've now also deleted the *joost.inc files. These were backups I made once. They are obsolete now. Jürgen

Re: I'm interested in the LyX 1.7.x XML format

rgheck — 2008-07-24T17:01:49

You can browse the current source---or for that matter, anything in svn---here: http://www.lyx.org/trac/browser/lyx-devel/trunk/. Where to start is a matter of what you're interested in. The file format is scattered around the code, mostly in the write() routines of the various insets (src/insets). A LyX document is a tree-like object, with a top inset---and InsetText---that contains text and other insets. So a footnote is an InsetFootnote, which is a subclass of InsetText, so it may itself contain additional insets, such as InsetFlex (what used to be called a charstyle). The process of writing a file starts with Buffer::write(), goes to Text::write() (in src/Text.cpp), and then to Paragraph::write(), which calls the various InsetFoo::write() routines as required. As I said, it's in those routines that the file format is actually contained. rh

Re: Instructions for: Credits, Blanket-permission and I18n (translations)

Christian Ridderström — 2008-07-24T15:59:40

Oh, I see. Done. I've also added a link to Wikipedia, as it describes the history of LyX. /Christian

Re: Instructions for: Credits, Blanket-permission and I18n (translations)

Christian Ridderström — 2008-07-24T15:51:18

Thanks to whomever that updated the text on SiteDocumentation accordingly. You are absolutely correct. Thanks for reminding me, I've now placed the files directly in farm/cookbook/LyX I've also updated the documentation accordingly. And added similar documentation for the page News. /Christian

Re: I'm interested in the LyX 1.7.x XML format

Steve Litt — 2008-07-24T15:50:56

I'm pretty sure I have LyX-1.5.3 source hanging around. What would be a good plan for learning it? What source files should I start with, and what should I be looking out for? My goal here would be to get a high level design overview, not to understand every little nuance. For instance, in the Samba source code, I found the place to start was the C struct that eventually became smb.conf. Thanks SteveT Steve Litt Recession Relief Package http://www.recession-relief.US

Re: Progress on the MS Word to LyX conversion (xml)

Abdelrazak Younes — 2008-07-24T14:22:38

I agree that we should not do it if there isn't enough people interested in doing the work. This cannot be a one or two man work. But this discussion is for lyx-devel so I redirected it :-) Abdel.

Re: Progress on the MS Word to LyX conversion (xml)

Abdelrazak Younes — 2008-07-24T13:51:23

I do :-) In my previous job we generated XML reports in C++. Those XML reportq were transformed to html and SVG before being published in our web server. They were also transformed to XSL-FO and published as pdf thanks to FOP. We also did multiple XML reports combination for data fusion and statistics. All of this using XSL. But note that the use of XSL is not mandatory. One could just use the XML python library and do whatever needed transformation by hand. We'll see. But odf is not our gold goal, at least it is not mine. For some of my (future) projects, I would personally like to be able to generate .lyx file programatically. OK, I know I could do this with current format but a clearly defined XML format together with a python library (lyx2lyx) would ease the path to that goal. That is just one use case were XML would be profitable. Abdel.

Re: I'm interested in the LyX 1.7.x XML format

Pavel Sanda — 2008-07-24T12:49:53

the format is not going to be newly inventented. the plan i have seen up to now were just to replace dual tags \blablala opts content \end_blabla by some content so i'm afraid that documenting the format means reading source code; there won't be any specification debate. pavel

Re: Progress on the MS Word to LyX conversion (xml)

Pavel Sanda — 2008-07-24T12:32:33

Abdel, you have some practical experience with that? I have been in project, where more easier xml format was used the we would have and it was pain to debug those conversion through xslt. From those times all those easy-to-do transformations between different xml formats become an urban legend to me, although i understand that one can't make definitive generalization from one experience... also that is the reason why i consider those plans that xml-isation will at the end turn into having some complete lyx<->odf converter, as only theoretical, or say marketing speech :) pavel

Re: [Cvslog] r25854 - in /lyx-devel/branches/BRANCH_1_5_X: development...

Bo Peng — 2008-07-24T12:26:49

On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 12:16 AM, Jürgen Spitzmüller public.gmane.org> wrote: It was intentional but I forgot why I did that now. :-) Bo

Re: Progress on the MS Word to LyX conversion (xml)

Charles de Miramon — 2008-07-24T12:15:18

I'm not saing that LaTeX should be the format but something that can be easily mapped to LaTeX. Today's LyX format is a simplified LaTeX. Cheers, Charles

Re: Progress on the MS Word to LyX conversion (xml)

José Matos — 2008-07-24T10:40:44

This idea was discussed before and it was abandoned more than 10 years ago. Every once in a while someone comes with that suggestion, and again we conclude that it does not work, the best that could be done would be that subject plus meta comments with annotations. That task is even more daunting than the conversion to xml.

Re: Progress on the MS Word to LyX conversion (xml)

Abdelrazak Younes — 2008-07-24T10:40:02

Those are different more complicated beast that have to care for finger painting, page positionning, reference linking etc. We don't have this kind of information in the format and that's why our XML format will be simple, very simple. As a first step it would look a lot like the present format (just replace \begin...\end with <>...). In the future, it could use a minimal subset of odf. But there is no way in hell that our format is going to be as complicated as odf, simply because the WYSYWIM concept freed us from that problematic. We'll see. If using on the shelf library is too slow, we'll just keep on parsing the file ourself and it will be fast. I understand that but see above. The reason why it will be simple in our case is precisely because our XML format will stay simple. Or just that nobody found an interest in learning it, or that no developer was interested in LateX. XSLT is quite easy in my experience. Oh, I agree. I tried to understand once the odf format but I got a head ache :-) Abdel.

Re: Progress on the MS Word to LyX conversion (xml)

Charles de Miramon — 2008-07-24T10:15:11

The slowness of XML parsing has been a complaint for KWord, OpenOffice, MsWord2007. If you cannot use a parser from the shelf (QtXml, LibXml2) but have to tweak something, what is the point. If it was true, there would be today rocksolid ODF <-> Docbook, ODF <-> TEI, ODF <->XML-FO converters. The idea that is very easy to transform one xml jargon to another xml jargon, is a myth. At some point in Koffice development, Robert Jacolin wrote a XSLT converter between KWord first XML format and LaTeX. He left the project but nobody continued its work because everybody hates XSLT. XML is nice for archival, interchange, standardized formats but is not an universal swissknife. Cheers, Charles

Re: Progress on the MS Word to LyX conversion (xml)

Abdelrazak Younes — 2008-07-24T09:50:27

If we can add some TEI compliant tags, I don't see why we cannot do so. But we don't have to support that natively, an XSL stylesheet will do just fine. That's a generalisation that is not really true, it really depends on your XML syntax. We are free to do what we want, so I am pretty sure the parsing will be as fast as nowadays. Really, do you see an increased difficulty when parsing ... instead of \begin_document...\end_document ? That's also a generalisation, we are going to make it easy to parse. In any case, certainly easier to parse than current format. Because XML is easy to transform. That is really the *main* reason. For example the transformation to TEI will be very, very simple, believe me. Not only that, but also transformations to HTML, ODF, etc. Heck, even a transformation to LateX would be possible if one day we decide that it is not worth maintaining the LateX code in C++. Abdel.

Re: Progress on the MS Word to LyX conversion (xml)

Charles de Miramon — 2008-07-24T09:46:21

Interesting blog measuring the performance impact when MsWord switched to an xml format. http://www.oooninja.com/2008/07/benchmarking-microsoft-word-95-2007.html

Re: Progress on the MS Word to LyX conversion (xml)

Charles de Miramon — 2008-07-24T09:35:11

TEI is an archival format. I doubt it is suitable for LyX. Like Pavel, I'm very dubitative of a move to an xml format. If you look the wordprocessing xml initiatives, they have all been failures (docbook, xml-fo / xsl-fo, xmltex). Odf succeeded more because of Microsoft's hate then anything else. Xml is slow to parse, the text is buried in very noisy formatting information and is difficult to hack. In my opinion, history has proved it is not adapted for wordprocessors. Lyx final product is LaTeX / XeTeX code. Why not keep a format that is parsable subset of LaTeX and can easily evolve when more and more LaTeX features are added to LyX. Cheers, Charles

Re: Approaching LyX 1.5.6

Jürgen Spitzmüller — 2008-07-24T05:17:53

No, I tag every release: http://www.lyx.org/trac/browser/lyx-devel/tags Jürgen

Re: [Cvslog] r25854 - in /lyx-devel/branches/BRANCH_1_5_X: development...

Jürgen Spitzmüller — 2008-07-24T05:16:33

Am Mittwoch, 23. Juli 2008 schrieb uwestoehr-0hXrFu2P2+c< at >public.gmane.org: Thanks. I wasn't aware that SCons does not use the LINUGAS file. Jürgen

Re: drop support for xymatrix?

John McCabe-Dansted — 2008-07-24T04:31:53

Some Journals class definitions clash with babel as well. There was a suggestion to have a "none (no-babel)" language", but I don't think it was never implemented. See: http://bugzilla.lyx.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2909 Is it too late for 1.6.0?