On 07/09/2016 07:36 AM, Guillaume Munch wrote: > Le 07/07/2016 19:25, Steve Litt a écrit : >> >> Since about 2008 LyX native format has become more and more "XML like" >> without being either valid or well formed XML.
This is news to me. The basic structure of LyX files has not changed in the time I've been working on LyX, and that goes back to before 2008. >> If they just made LyX >> into valid and well formed XML, creating our own converter, with Python >> and Python's XML parser, will become a one person project. As Gullaume says, the problem is to get someone with enough time and desire to do it. >> There is a lot of wishes in your message. But I must warn, if you >> ever happen to find this one person for the task, that their time is >> better used within the project than outside of it. You can have a look >> at the example of eLyXer, which has decided to go on its own. It still >> has not caught up with the 2.2 format. > > I think eLyXer was a very special case. My memory is that Alex > Fernandez very much wanted his eLyXer incorporated into LyX, and > instead the powers that be postponed him over and over again until they > wrote their own, which substantially duplicated eLyXer's features and > its problems. There was a long discussion about how to proceed with this, and the "powers that be" decided that Alex's approach was the wrong one. Its maintenance costs alone were staggering, which is why it hasn't kept up with developments. The truth is that LyX will have stellar XML/HTML/whatever output when, as I said, someone has enough time and desire to make it do so. I wrote the HTML export code as proof of concept. Richard PS I'll shortly commit a fix for the <a name=".."> issue.
