Re: 1.5 feature request: textsuperscript textsubscript
Tim Holy wrote: And, of course, no lyx_trial.odt file. I even did an updatedb and found the tex4ht.env file (in two places). Finally, executing the following command: tex4ht oolatex -e/etc/tex4ht/tex4ht.env lyx_trial appeared to be successful. It created a whole heap of files, but none of them looked like OpenDoc files. The closest was an XML file with the extension .4oo, but opening this will oowriter did not yield anything that looked like a normal document. The TeX4ht package in Debian (and I guess in Ubuntu) was unmaintained and quite broken. New versions are better. Cheers, Charles -- http://www.kde-france.org
Re: 1.5 feature request: textsuperscript textsubscript
Hi, On Friday 25 May 2007, Charles de Miramon wrote: The TeX4ht package in Debian (and I guess in Ubuntu) was unmaintained and quite broken. New versions are better. OK, thanks for this. I posted something yesterday on the Ubuntu forums. Since it seems to not just be me, I'll file it as a real bug report. Thanks, --Tim Cheers, Charles
Re: 1.5 feature request: textsuperscript textsubscript
Dear Enrico, On Thursday 24 May 2007, Enrico Forestieri wrote: Notice that OpenOffice is at fault here and not latex2rtf. By default, latex2rtf uses EQ field codes for translating math constructs (see http://office.microsoft.com/en-gb/word/HP051861481033.aspx) but OpenOffice is not able to interpret them. Your example works perfectly when I open the produced rtf in Word. Maybe you could file an enhancement request to the OO people. I could have sworn I'd tested that, but I must have first saved as .doc in OO and then opened it in Word. Thanks for pointing this out! The one thing that doesn't work right is the italicization of the superscript---I guess latex2rtf doesn't ignore the text within the \text command (which it doesn't understand), it just puts it in wholesale. Thanks, --Tim
Re: 1.5 feature request: textsuperscript textsubscript
Tim Holy wrote: On Thursday 24 May 2007, Enrico Forestieri wrote: Notice that OpenOffice is at fault here and not latex2rtf. By default, latex2rtf uses EQ field codes for translating math constructs (see http://office.microsoft.com/en-gb/word/HP051861481033.aspx) but OpenOffice is not able to interpret them. Your example works perfectly when I open the produced rtf in Word. Maybe you could file an enhancement request to the OO people. I could have sworn I'd tested that, but I must have first saved as .doc in OO and then opened it in Word. Thanks for pointing this out! The one thing that doesn't work right is the italicization of the superscript---I guess latex2rtf doesn't ignore the text within the \text command (which it doesn't understand), it just puts it in wholesale. And here's something even more obvious that I forgot: CharStyles can be used to do \text*script. It won't look right on screen, but you'll get the right output. rh
Re: 1.5 feature request: textsuperscript textsubscript
Tim Holy wrote: And, of course, no lyx_trial.odt file. I even did an updatedb and found the tex4ht.env file (in two places). Finally, executing the following command: tex4ht oolatex -e/etc/tex4ht/tex4ht.env lyx_trial appeared to be successful. It created a whole heap of files, but none of them looked like OpenDoc files. The closest was an XML file with the extension .4oo, but opening this will oowriter did not yield anything that looked like a normal document. The TeX4ht package in Debian (and I guess in Ubuntu) was unmaintained and quite broken. New versions are better. Cheers, Charles -- http://www.kde-france.org
Re: 1.5 feature request: textsuperscript textsubscript
Hi, On Friday 25 May 2007, Charles de Miramon wrote: The TeX4ht package in Debian (and I guess in Ubuntu) was unmaintained and quite broken. New versions are better. OK, thanks for this. I posted something yesterday on the Ubuntu forums. Since it seems to not just be me, I'll file it as a real bug report. Thanks, --Tim Cheers, Charles
Re: 1.5 feature request: textsuperscript textsubscript
Dear Enrico, On Thursday 24 May 2007, Enrico Forestieri wrote: Notice that OpenOffice is at fault here and not latex2rtf. By default, latex2rtf uses EQ field codes for translating math constructs (see http://office.microsoft.com/en-gb/word/HP051861481033.aspx) but OpenOffice is not able to interpret them. Your example works perfectly when I open the produced rtf in Word. Maybe you could file an enhancement request to the OO people. I could have sworn I'd tested that, but I must have first saved as .doc in OO and then opened it in Word. Thanks for pointing this out! The one thing that doesn't work right is the italicization of the superscript---I guess latex2rtf doesn't ignore the text within the \text command (which it doesn't understand), it just puts it in wholesale. Thanks, --Tim
Re: 1.5 feature request: textsuperscript textsubscript
Tim Holy wrote: On Thursday 24 May 2007, Enrico Forestieri wrote: Notice that OpenOffice is at fault here and not latex2rtf. By default, latex2rtf uses EQ field codes for translating math constructs (see http://office.microsoft.com/en-gb/word/HP051861481033.aspx) but OpenOffice is not able to interpret them. Your example works perfectly when I open the produced rtf in Word. Maybe you could file an enhancement request to the OO people. I could have sworn I'd tested that, but I must have first saved as .doc in OO and then opened it in Word. Thanks for pointing this out! The one thing that doesn't work right is the italicization of the superscript---I guess latex2rtf doesn't ignore the text within the \text command (which it doesn't understand), it just puts it in wholesale. And here's something even more obvious that I forgot: CharStyles can be used to do \text*script. It won't look right on screen, but you'll get the right output. rh
Re: 1.5 feature request: textsuperscript & textsubscript
Tim Holy wrote: > And, of course, no lyx_trial.odt file. I even did an updatedb and found > the tex4ht.env file (in two places). Finally, executing the following > command: tex4ht oolatex -e/etc/tex4ht/tex4ht.env lyx_trial > appeared to be successful. It created a whole heap of files, but none of > them looked like OpenDoc files. The closest was an XML file with the > extension .4oo, but opening this will oowriter did not yield anything that > looked like a normal document. > The TeX4ht package in Debian (and I guess in Ubuntu) was unmaintained and quite broken. New versions are better. Cheers, Charles -- http://www.kde-france.org
Re: 1.5 feature request: textsuperscript & textsubscript
Hi, On Friday 25 May 2007, Charles de Miramon wrote: > The TeX4ht package in Debian (and I guess in Ubuntu) was unmaintained and > quite broken. New versions are better. OK, thanks for this. I posted something yesterday on the Ubuntu forums. Since it seems to not just be me, I'll file it as a real bug report. Thanks, --Tim > > Cheers, > Charles
Re: 1.5 feature request: textsuperscript & textsubscript
Dear Enrico, On Thursday 24 May 2007, Enrico Forestieri wrote: > Notice that OpenOffice is at fault here and not latex2rtf. > By default, latex2rtf uses EQ field codes for translating math constructs > (see http://office.microsoft.com/en-gb/word/HP051861481033.aspx) > but OpenOffice is not able to interpret them. > > Your example works perfectly when I open the produced rtf in Word. > Maybe you could file an enhancement request to the OO people. I could have sworn I'd tested that, but I must have first saved as .doc in OO and then opened it in Word. Thanks for pointing this out! The one thing that doesn't work right is the italicization of the superscript---I guess latex2rtf doesn't ignore the text within the \text command (which it doesn't understand), it just puts it in wholesale. Thanks, --Tim
Re: 1.5 feature request: textsuperscript & textsubscript
Tim Holy wrote: On Thursday 24 May 2007, Enrico Forestieri wrote: Notice that OpenOffice is at fault here and not latex2rtf. By default, latex2rtf uses EQ field codes for translating math constructs (see http://office.microsoft.com/en-gb/word/HP051861481033.aspx) but OpenOffice is not able to interpret them. Your example works perfectly when I open the produced rtf in Word. Maybe you could file an enhancement request to the OO people. I could have sworn I'd tested that, but I must have first saved as .doc in OO and then opened it in Word. Thanks for pointing this out! The one thing that doesn't work right is the italicization of the superscript---I guess latex2rtf doesn't ignore the text within the \text command (which it doesn't understand), it just puts it in wholesale. And here's something even more obvious that I forgot: CharStyles can be used to do \text*script. It won't look right on screen, but you'll get the right output. rh
1.5 feature request: textsuperscript textsubscript
Hello,
At least in the biological sciences, most journals can't accept LaTeX, and so
it's important for us to be able to export to RTF format for final submission
of papers. In LyX 1.5.0beta3 (and also in the 1.4 series), exporting to RTF
works well with a notable exception: super- and subscripts in text. The
reason for this is that these text superscripts are handled as $^\text{some
text}$, and latex2rtf doesn't recognize the \text command. Consequently, the
super and subscripts simply get omitted, which is a problem especially in
papers that are heavy on chemical formulas...
However, latex2rtf does handle \textsuperscript and \textsubscript correctly.
Would it be possible to have LyX implement things using these commands
instead of using the math-mode commands?
An example document is attached. Under LyX 1.5.0beta3, one simply needs to
export as Rich Text Format and then open the file with OpenOffice to see what
I'm talking about.
Best,
--Tim
lyx_trial.lyx
Description: application/lyx
Re: 1.5 feature request: textsuperscript textsubscript
Tim Holy [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: At least in the biological sciences, most journals can't accept LaTeX, and so it's important for us to be able to export to RTF format for final submission of papers. [snip] However, latex2rtf does handle \textsuperscript and \textsubscript correctly. Would it be possible to have LyX implement things using these commands instead of using the math-mode commands? You'd probably rather send this to the developers list to get attention. Regards, Andreas
Re: 1.5 feature request: textsuperscript textsubscript
Andreas K. wrote: Tim Holy [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: At least in the biological sciences, most journals can't accept LaTeX, and so it's important for us to be able to export to RTF format for final submission of papers. [snip] However, latex2rtf does handle \textsuperscript and \textsubscript correctly. Would it be possible to have LyX implement things using these commands instead of using the math-mode commands? You'd probably rather send this to the developers list to get attention. And also create an enhancement entry in bugzilla.lyx.org Abdel.
Re: 1.5 feature request: textsuperscript textsubscript
Tim Holy wrote:
At least in the biological sciences, most journals can't accept LaTeX, and so
it's important for us to be able to export to RTF format for final submission
of papers.
Try exporting to OpenDocument. In my experience, oolatex tends to be
more reliable than latex2rtf, which hasn't seen an update in 2.5 years.
In LyX 1.5.0beta3 (and also in the 1.4 series), exporting to RTF
works well with a notable exception: super- and subscripts in text. The
reason for this is that these text superscripts are handled as $^\text{some
text}$, and latex2rtf doesn't recognize the \text command. Consequently, the
super and subscripts simply get omitted, which is a problem especially in
papers that are heavy on chemical formulas...
This seems to work with oolatex, though it does give you a formula
rather than a text superscript.
However, latex2rtf does handle \textsuperscript and \textsubscript correctly.
Would it be possible to have LyX implement things using these commands
instead of using the math-mode commands?
Possible, yes, but sufficiently non-trivial that it won't happen by
1.5.0, as we're too close to release and are more or less at
feature-freeze. Please file a bugzilla enchancement request so we don't
lose track of the issue, though. I'd like to have this myself.
It would, by the way, be very, very easy to write a translating script
that would take a LaTeX file as export by LyX and convert the offending
material. I've attached a perl script that will do it. Ugly, but mostly
because of the need to escape $, {, etc. Without the escapes, it's just:
s/$^{\text{([^}]*)}}/\textsuperscript{$1}/g;
This will fail if you have } in your superscript. (You could obviously
do the same thing in Python.) Using this, you could write a simple
script to wrap oolatex (or latex2rtf). On *nix:
#!/bin/bash
file=$1;
cp $file $file.tmp
perl fixscripts.pl $file.tmp $file;
oolatex $file;
rm $file.tmp
Save that where you wish and then change the LaTeX to OpenDocument
converter, in Tools Preferences Converters, to call this rather than
oolatex directly. Voila.
Richard
--
==
Richard G Heck, Jr
Professor of Philosophy
Brown University
http://frege.brown.edu/heck/
==
Get my public key from http://sks.keyserver.penguin.de
Hash: 0x1DE91F1E66FFBDEC
Learn how to sign your email using Thunderbird and GnuPG at:
http://dudu.dyn.2-h.org/nist/gpg-enigmail-howto
test.pl
Description: Perl program
Re: 1.5 feature request: textsuperscript textsubscript
Dear Richard,
Thanks very much for your response.
On Thursday 24 May 2007, Richard Heck wrote:
Tim Holy wrote:
At least in the biological sciences, most journals can't accept LaTeX,
and so it's important for us to be able to export to RTF format for final
submission of papers.
Try exporting to OpenDocument. In my experience, oolatex tends to be
more reliable than latex2rtf, which hasn't seen an update in 2.5 years.
That sounds like a good answer to my problem; I'd actually never heard of
oolatex before. I had even spent some time googling for latex2odf.
However, I'm having an unexpected degree of trouble getting oolatex to work.
First, for me neither LyX 1.4.3 nor LyX 1.5.0beta3 gives an OpenDoc option
under its list of export formats. (See the attached screen shot of the export
menu on my machine.)
So I figured I'd have to export to LaTeX and then run oolatex from the command
line. Next problem: oolatex does not seem to have a clear home on the net,
and doing an apt-cache search oolatex under Kubuntu Feisty (even with
universe multiverse enabled) doesn't come up with anything. I guessed that
under Kubuntu one needs to install tex4ht. I then found the oolatex
executable in /usr/share/tex4ht/ (it wasn't placed on the global path). I
added this directory to my path. But then running oolatex resulted in the
following output (note: 29 pages of output! For 2 lines of text?):
[snip]
Output written on lyx_trial.dvi (29 pages, 54456 bytes).
Transcript written on lyx_trial.log.
tex4ht.c (2006-09-13-14:27 kpathsea)
tex4ht -f/lyx_trial.tex
-i/usr/share/texmf/tex4ht/ht-fonts/
-cmozhtf
--- warning --- Can't find/open file `tex4ht.env | .tex4ht'
--- error --- Illegal storage address
t4ht.c (2006-09-13-14:28 kpathsea)
t4ht -f/lyx_trial.tex
-coo
--- warning --- Can't find/open file `tex4ht.env | .tex4ht'
--- warning --- Can't find/open file `lyx_trial.lg'
And, of course, no lyx_trial.odt file. I even did an updatedb and found the
tex4ht.env file (in two places). Finally, executing the following command:
tex4ht oolatex -e/etc/tex4ht/tex4ht.env lyx_trial
appeared to be successful. It created a whole heap of files, but none of them
looked like OpenDoc files. The closest was an XML file with the
extension .4oo, but opening this will oowriter did not yield anything that
looked like a normal document.
I also tried redoing ./configure, make clean, make for LyX 1.5.0beta3 to see
if, after installing tex4ht, it would present me with an OpenDocument export
option. No dice.
Searching the LyX wiki for oolatex yields 0 documents. However, one can find
http://wiki.lyx.org/Tools/LyX2OpenOffice, which recommends ConvLaTeX. Which I
then downloaded and installed. After reading the documentation and
configuring it (it's a bit non-standard...), I finally got it to output a
file, but it was a .sxw (not OpenDoc) and it didn't handle the subscripts and
superscripts correctly anyway. (I even asked OO to save as a .doc file and
opened it in MSWord under Wine, but that didn't show anything useful,
either.)
At this point I'm suspecting there's a really simple answer that I'm missing.
Or there's some weird use-case bug (or Ubuntu-specific issue?) that's causing
me all this grief. I'd be happy to file a bug report, but it seems like I'm
running up against so much weirdness that I hardly know where to start.
It would, by the way, be very, very easy to write a translating script
that would take a LaTeX file as export by LyX and convert the offending
material.
I like that solution, I was considering it myself, and was about to start
writing one when I got your email. Many thanks!
Best,
--Tim
I've attached a perl script that will do it. Ugly, but mostly
because of the need to escape $, {, etc. Without the escapes, it's just:
s/$^{\text{([^}]*)}}/\textsuperscript{$1}/g;
This will fail if you have } in your superscript. (You could obviously
do the same thing in Python.) Using this, you could write a simple
script to wrap oolatex (or latex2rtf). On *nix:
#!/bin/bash
file=$1;
cp $file $file.tmp
perl fixscripts.pl $file.tmp $file;
oolatex $file;
rm $file.tmp
Save that where you wish and then change the LaTeX to OpenDocument
converter, in Tools Preferences Converters, to call this rather than
oolatex directly. Voila.
Richard
attachment: export_options.png
Re: 1.5 feature request: textsuperscript textsubscript
On Thursday 24 May 2007, Richard Heck wrote: Tim Holy wrote: At least in the biological sciences, most journals can't accept LaTeX, and so it's important for us to be able to export to RTF format for final submission of papers. Try exporting to OpenDocument. In my experience, oolatex tends to be more reliable than latex2rtf, which hasn't seen an update in 2.5 years. That sounds like a good answer to my problem; I'd actually never heard of oolatex before. I had even spent some time googling for latex2odf. It's not exactly got an obvious name. However, I'm having an unexpected degree of trouble getting oolatex to work. First, for me neither LyX 1.4.3 nor LyX 1.5.0beta3 gives an OpenDoc option under its list of export formats. (See the attached screen shot of the export menu on my machine.) LyX is looking for oolatex in your path. If it's not there, configure.py won't find it. If it is in your path, then configure.py should find it. Try running LyX from the command line and then reconfiguring. Watch the output for information about oolatex. So I figured I'd have to export to LaTeX and then run oolatex from the command line. Next problem: oolatex does not seem to have a clear home on the net, and doing an apt-cache search oolatex under Kubuntu Feisty (even with universe multiverse enabled) doesn't come up with anything. I guessed that under Kubuntu one needs to install tex4ht. Yes, it's part of the tex4ht package. I then found the oolatex executable in /usr/share/tex4ht/ (it wasn't placed on the global path). I added this directory to my path. But then running oolatex resulted in the following output (note: 29 pages of output! For 2 lines of text?): [snip] There's some configuration problem here. On Fedora 6, this just works. Try asking about this on the Ubuntu list, or whatever there is along those lines. rh -- == Richard G Heck, Jr Professor of Philosophy Brown University http://frege.brown.edu/heck/ == Get my public key from http://sks.keyserver.penguin.de Hash: 0x1DE91F1E66FFBDEC Learn how to sign your email using Thunderbird and GnuPG at: http://dudu.dyn.2-h.org/nist/gpg-enigmail-howto
Re: 1.5 feature request: textsuperscript textsubscript
Tim Holy writes:
Hello,
At least in the biological sciences, most journals can't accept LaTeX, and so
it's important for us to be able to export to RTF format for final submission
of papers. In LyX 1.5.0beta3 (and also in the 1.4 series), exporting to RTF
works well with a notable exception: super- and subscripts in text. The
reason for this is that these text superscripts are handled as $^\text{some
text}$, and latex2rtf doesn't recognize the \text command. Consequently, the
super and subscripts simply get omitted, which is a problem especially in
papers that are heavy on chemical formulas...
Notice that OpenOffice is at fault here and not latex2rtf.
By default, latex2rtf uses EQ field codes for translating math constructs
(see http://office.microsoft.com/en-gb/word/HP051861481033.aspx)
but OpenOffice is not able to interpret them.
An example document is attached. Under LyX 1.5.0beta3, one simply needs to
export as Rich Text Format and then open the file with OpenOffice to see what
I'm talking about.
Your example works perfectly when I open the produced rtf in Word.
Maybe you could file an enhancement request to the OO people.
--
Enrico
1.5 feature request: textsuperscript textsubscript
Hello,
At least in the biological sciences, most journals can't accept LaTeX, and so
it's important for us to be able to export to RTF format for final submission
of papers. In LyX 1.5.0beta3 (and also in the 1.4 series), exporting to RTF
works well with a notable exception: super- and subscripts in text. The
reason for this is that these text superscripts are handled as $^\text{some
text}$, and latex2rtf doesn't recognize the \text command. Consequently, the
super and subscripts simply get omitted, which is a problem especially in
papers that are heavy on chemical formulas...
However, latex2rtf does handle \textsuperscript and \textsubscript correctly.
Would it be possible to have LyX implement things using these commands
instead of using the math-mode commands?
An example document is attached. Under LyX 1.5.0beta3, one simply needs to
export as Rich Text Format and then open the file with OpenOffice to see what
I'm talking about.
Best,
--Tim
lyx_trial.lyx
Description: application/lyx
Re: 1.5 feature request: textsuperscript textsubscript
Tim Holy [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: At least in the biological sciences, most journals can't accept LaTeX, and so it's important for us to be able to export to RTF format for final submission of papers. [snip] However, latex2rtf does handle \textsuperscript and \textsubscript correctly. Would it be possible to have LyX implement things using these commands instead of using the math-mode commands? You'd probably rather send this to the developers list to get attention. Regards, Andreas
Re: 1.5 feature request: textsuperscript textsubscript
Andreas K. wrote: Tim Holy [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: At least in the biological sciences, most journals can't accept LaTeX, and so it's important for us to be able to export to RTF format for final submission of papers. [snip] However, latex2rtf does handle \textsuperscript and \textsubscript correctly. Would it be possible to have LyX implement things using these commands instead of using the math-mode commands? You'd probably rather send this to the developers list to get attention. And also create an enhancement entry in bugzilla.lyx.org Abdel.
Re: 1.5 feature request: textsuperscript textsubscript
Tim Holy wrote:
At least in the biological sciences, most journals can't accept LaTeX, and so
it's important for us to be able to export to RTF format for final submission
of papers.
Try exporting to OpenDocument. In my experience, oolatex tends to be
more reliable than latex2rtf, which hasn't seen an update in 2.5 years.
In LyX 1.5.0beta3 (and also in the 1.4 series), exporting to RTF
works well with a notable exception: super- and subscripts in text. The
reason for this is that these text superscripts are handled as $^\text{some
text}$, and latex2rtf doesn't recognize the \text command. Consequently, the
super and subscripts simply get omitted, which is a problem especially in
papers that are heavy on chemical formulas...
This seems to work with oolatex, though it does give you a formula
rather than a text superscript.
However, latex2rtf does handle \textsuperscript and \textsubscript correctly.
Would it be possible to have LyX implement things using these commands
instead of using the math-mode commands?
Possible, yes, but sufficiently non-trivial that it won't happen by
1.5.0, as we're too close to release and are more or less at
feature-freeze. Please file a bugzilla enchancement request so we don't
lose track of the issue, though. I'd like to have this myself.
It would, by the way, be very, very easy to write a translating script
that would take a LaTeX file as export by LyX and convert the offending
material. I've attached a perl script that will do it. Ugly, but mostly
because of the need to escape $, {, etc. Without the escapes, it's just:
s/$^{\text{([^}]*)}}/\textsuperscript{$1}/g;
This will fail if you have } in your superscript. (You could obviously
do the same thing in Python.) Using this, you could write a simple
script to wrap oolatex (or latex2rtf). On *nix:
#!/bin/bash
file=$1;
cp $file $file.tmp
perl fixscripts.pl $file.tmp $file;
oolatex $file;
rm $file.tmp
Save that where you wish and then change the LaTeX to OpenDocument
converter, in Tools Preferences Converters, to call this rather than
oolatex directly. Voila.
Richard
--
==
Richard G Heck, Jr
Professor of Philosophy
Brown University
http://frege.brown.edu/heck/
==
Get my public key from http://sks.keyserver.penguin.de
Hash: 0x1DE91F1E66FFBDEC
Learn how to sign your email using Thunderbird and GnuPG at:
http://dudu.dyn.2-h.org/nist/gpg-enigmail-howto
test.pl
Description: Perl program
Re: 1.5 feature request: textsuperscript textsubscript
Dear Richard,
Thanks very much for your response.
On Thursday 24 May 2007, Richard Heck wrote:
Tim Holy wrote:
At least in the biological sciences, most journals can't accept LaTeX,
and so it's important for us to be able to export to RTF format for final
submission of papers.
Try exporting to OpenDocument. In my experience, oolatex tends to be
more reliable than latex2rtf, which hasn't seen an update in 2.5 years.
That sounds like a good answer to my problem; I'd actually never heard of
oolatex before. I had even spent some time googling for latex2odf.
However, I'm having an unexpected degree of trouble getting oolatex to work.
First, for me neither LyX 1.4.3 nor LyX 1.5.0beta3 gives an OpenDoc option
under its list of export formats. (See the attached screen shot of the export
menu on my machine.)
So I figured I'd have to export to LaTeX and then run oolatex from the command
line. Next problem: oolatex does not seem to have a clear home on the net,
and doing an apt-cache search oolatex under Kubuntu Feisty (even with
universe multiverse enabled) doesn't come up with anything. I guessed that
under Kubuntu one needs to install tex4ht. I then found the oolatex
executable in /usr/share/tex4ht/ (it wasn't placed on the global path). I
added this directory to my path. But then running oolatex resulted in the
following output (note: 29 pages of output! For 2 lines of text?):
[snip]
Output written on lyx_trial.dvi (29 pages, 54456 bytes).
Transcript written on lyx_trial.log.
tex4ht.c (2006-09-13-14:27 kpathsea)
tex4ht -f/lyx_trial.tex
-i/usr/share/texmf/tex4ht/ht-fonts/
-cmozhtf
--- warning --- Can't find/open file `tex4ht.env | .tex4ht'
--- error --- Illegal storage address
t4ht.c (2006-09-13-14:28 kpathsea)
t4ht -f/lyx_trial.tex
-coo
--- warning --- Can't find/open file `tex4ht.env | .tex4ht'
--- warning --- Can't find/open file `lyx_trial.lg'
And, of course, no lyx_trial.odt file. I even did an updatedb and found the
tex4ht.env file (in two places). Finally, executing the following command:
tex4ht oolatex -e/etc/tex4ht/tex4ht.env lyx_trial
appeared to be successful. It created a whole heap of files, but none of them
looked like OpenDoc files. The closest was an XML file with the
extension .4oo, but opening this will oowriter did not yield anything that
looked like a normal document.
I also tried redoing ./configure, make clean, make for LyX 1.5.0beta3 to see
if, after installing tex4ht, it would present me with an OpenDocument export
option. No dice.
Searching the LyX wiki for oolatex yields 0 documents. However, one can find
http://wiki.lyx.org/Tools/LyX2OpenOffice, which recommends ConvLaTeX. Which I
then downloaded and installed. After reading the documentation and
configuring it (it's a bit non-standard...), I finally got it to output a
file, but it was a .sxw (not OpenDoc) and it didn't handle the subscripts and
superscripts correctly anyway. (I even asked OO to save as a .doc file and
opened it in MSWord under Wine, but that didn't show anything useful,
either.)
At this point I'm suspecting there's a really simple answer that I'm missing.
Or there's some weird use-case bug (or Ubuntu-specific issue?) that's causing
me all this grief. I'd be happy to file a bug report, but it seems like I'm
running up against so much weirdness that I hardly know where to start.
It would, by the way, be very, very easy to write a translating script
that would take a LaTeX file as export by LyX and convert the offending
material.
I like that solution, I was considering it myself, and was about to start
writing one when I got your email. Many thanks!
Best,
--Tim
I've attached a perl script that will do it. Ugly, but mostly
because of the need to escape $, {, etc. Without the escapes, it's just:
s/$^{\text{([^}]*)}}/\textsuperscript{$1}/g;
This will fail if you have } in your superscript. (You could obviously
do the same thing in Python.) Using this, you could write a simple
script to wrap oolatex (or latex2rtf). On *nix:
#!/bin/bash
file=$1;
cp $file $file.tmp
perl fixscripts.pl $file.tmp $file;
oolatex $file;
rm $file.tmp
Save that where you wish and then change the LaTeX to OpenDocument
converter, in Tools Preferences Converters, to call this rather than
oolatex directly. Voila.
Richard
attachment: export_options.png
Re: 1.5 feature request: textsuperscript textsubscript
On Thursday 24 May 2007, Richard Heck wrote: Tim Holy wrote: At least in the biological sciences, most journals can't accept LaTeX, and so it's important for us to be able to export to RTF format for final submission of papers. Try exporting to OpenDocument. In my experience, oolatex tends to be more reliable than latex2rtf, which hasn't seen an update in 2.5 years. That sounds like a good answer to my problem; I'd actually never heard of oolatex before. I had even spent some time googling for latex2odf. It's not exactly got an obvious name. However, I'm having an unexpected degree of trouble getting oolatex to work. First, for me neither LyX 1.4.3 nor LyX 1.5.0beta3 gives an OpenDoc option under its list of export formats. (See the attached screen shot of the export menu on my machine.) LyX is looking for oolatex in your path. If it's not there, configure.py won't find it. If it is in your path, then configure.py should find it. Try running LyX from the command line and then reconfiguring. Watch the output for information about oolatex. So I figured I'd have to export to LaTeX and then run oolatex from the command line. Next problem: oolatex does not seem to have a clear home on the net, and doing an apt-cache search oolatex under Kubuntu Feisty (even with universe multiverse enabled) doesn't come up with anything. I guessed that under Kubuntu one needs to install tex4ht. Yes, it's part of the tex4ht package. I then found the oolatex executable in /usr/share/tex4ht/ (it wasn't placed on the global path). I added this directory to my path. But then running oolatex resulted in the following output (note: 29 pages of output! For 2 lines of text?): [snip] There's some configuration problem here. On Fedora 6, this just works. Try asking about this on the Ubuntu list, or whatever there is along those lines. rh -- == Richard G Heck, Jr Professor of Philosophy Brown University http://frege.brown.edu/heck/ == Get my public key from http://sks.keyserver.penguin.de Hash: 0x1DE91F1E66FFBDEC Learn how to sign your email using Thunderbird and GnuPG at: http://dudu.dyn.2-h.org/nist/gpg-enigmail-howto
Re: 1.5 feature request: textsuperscript textsubscript
Tim Holy writes:
Hello,
At least in the biological sciences, most journals can't accept LaTeX, and so
it's important for us to be able to export to RTF format for final submission
of papers. In LyX 1.5.0beta3 (and also in the 1.4 series), exporting to RTF
works well with a notable exception: super- and subscripts in text. The
reason for this is that these text superscripts are handled as $^\text{some
text}$, and latex2rtf doesn't recognize the \text command. Consequently, the
super and subscripts simply get omitted, which is a problem especially in
papers that are heavy on chemical formulas...
Notice that OpenOffice is at fault here and not latex2rtf.
By default, latex2rtf uses EQ field codes for translating math constructs
(see http://office.microsoft.com/en-gb/word/HP051861481033.aspx)
but OpenOffice is not able to interpret them.
An example document is attached. Under LyX 1.5.0beta3, one simply needs to
export as Rich Text Format and then open the file with OpenOffice to see what
I'm talking about.
Your example works perfectly when I open the produced rtf in Word.
Maybe you could file an enhancement request to the OO people.
--
Enrico
1.5 feature request: textsuperscript & textsubscript
Hello,
At least in the biological sciences, most journals can't accept LaTeX, and so
it's important for us to be able to export to RTF format for final submission
of papers. In LyX 1.5.0beta3 (and also in the 1.4 series), exporting to RTF
works well with a notable exception: super- and subscripts in text. The
reason for this is that these text superscripts are handled as $^\text{some
text}$, and latex2rtf doesn't recognize the \text command. Consequently, the
super and subscripts simply get omitted, which is a problem especially in
papers that are heavy on chemical formulas...
However, latex2rtf does handle \textsuperscript and \textsubscript correctly.
Would it be possible to have LyX implement things using these commands
instead of using the math-mode commands?
An example document is attached. Under LyX 1.5.0beta3, one simply needs to
export as Rich Text Format and then open the file with OpenOffice to see what
I'm talking about.
Best,
--Tim
lyx_trial.lyx
Description: application/lyx
Re: 1.5 feature request: textsuperscript & textsubscript
Tim Holy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > At least in the biological sciences, most journals can't accept LaTeX, and so > it's important for us to be able to export to RTF format for final submission > of papers. [snip] > However, latex2rtf does handle \textsuperscript and \textsubscript correctly. > Would it be possible to have LyX implement things using these commands > instead of using the math-mode commands? You'd probably rather send this to the developers list to get attention. Regards, Andreas
Re: 1.5 feature request: textsuperscript & textsubscript
Andreas K. wrote: Tim Holy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: At least in the biological sciences, most journals can't accept LaTeX, and so it's important for us to be able to export to RTF format for final submission of papers. [snip] However, latex2rtf does handle \textsuperscript and \textsubscript correctly. Would it be possible to have LyX implement things using these commands instead of using the math-mode commands? You'd probably rather send this to the developers list to get attention. And also create an "enhancement" entry in bugzilla.lyx.org Abdel.
Re: 1.5 feature request: textsuperscript & textsubscript
Tim Holy wrote:
> At least in the biological sciences, most journals can't accept LaTeX, and so
> it's important for us to be able to export to RTF format for final submission
> of papers.
Try exporting to OpenDocument. In my experience, oolatex tends to be
more reliable than latex2rtf, which hasn't seen an update in 2.5 years.
> In LyX 1.5.0beta3 (and also in the 1.4 series), exporting to RTF
> works well with a notable exception: super- and subscripts in text. The
> reason for this is that these text superscripts are handled as $^\text{some
> text}$, and latex2rtf doesn't recognize the \text command. Consequently, the
> super and subscripts simply get omitted, which is a problem especially in
> papers that are heavy on chemical formulas...
>
This seems to work with oolatex, though it does give you a formula
rather than a text superscript.
> However, latex2rtf does handle \textsuperscript and \textsubscript correctly.
> Would it be possible to have LyX implement things using these commands
> instead of using the math-mode commands?
>
Possible, yes, but sufficiently non-trivial that it won't happen by
1.5.0, as we're too close to release and are more or less at
feature-freeze. Please file a bugzilla enchancement request so we don't
lose track of the issue, though. I'd like to have this myself.
It would, by the way, be very, very easy to write a translating script
that would take a LaTeX file as export by LyX and convert the offending
material. I've attached a perl script that will do it. Ugly, but mostly
because of the need to escape $, {, etc. Without the escapes, it's just:
s/$^{\text{([^}]*)}}/\textsuperscript{$1}/g;
This will fail if you have "}" in your superscript. (You could obviously
do the same thing in Python.) Using this, you could write a simple
script to wrap oolatex (or latex2rtf). On *nix:
#!/bin/bash
file=$1;
cp $file $file.tmp
perl fixscripts.pl <$file.tmp >$file;
oolatex $file;
rm $file.tmp
Save that where you wish and then change the LaTeX to OpenDocument
converter, in Tools> Preferences> Converters, to call this rather than
oolatex directly. Voila.
Richard
--
==
Richard G Heck, Jr
Professor of Philosophy
Brown University
http://frege.brown.edu/heck/
==
Get my public key from http://sks.keyserver.penguin.de
Hash: 0x1DE91F1E66FFBDEC
Learn how to sign your email using Thunderbird and GnuPG at:
http://dudu.dyn.2-h.org/nist/gpg-enigmail-howto
test.pl
Description: Perl program
Re: 1.5 feature request: textsuperscript & textsubscript
Dear Richard,
Thanks very much for your response.
On Thursday 24 May 2007, Richard Heck wrote:
> Tim Holy wrote:
> > At least in the biological sciences, most journals can't accept LaTeX,
> > and so it's important for us to be able to export to RTF format for final
> > submission of papers.
>
> Try exporting to OpenDocument. In my experience, oolatex tends to be
> more reliable than latex2rtf, which hasn't seen an update in 2.5 years.
That sounds like a good answer to my problem; I'd actually never heard of
oolatex before. I had even spent some time googling for "latex2odf."
However, I'm having an unexpected degree of trouble getting oolatex to work.
First, for me neither LyX 1.4.3 nor LyX 1.5.0beta3 gives an OpenDoc option
under its list of export formats. (See the attached screen shot of the export
menu on my machine.)
So I figured I'd have to export to LaTeX and then run oolatex from the command
line. Next problem: oolatex does not seem to have a clear "home" on the net,
and doing an "apt-cache search oolatex" under Kubuntu Feisty (even with
universe & multiverse enabled) doesn't come up with anything. I guessed that
under Kubuntu one needs to install tex4ht. I then found the oolatex
executable in /usr/share/tex4ht/ (it wasn't placed on the global path). I
added this directory to my path. But then running oolatex resulted in the
following output (note: 29 pages of output! For 2 lines of text?):
[snip]
Output written on lyx_trial.dvi (29 pages, 54456 bytes).
Transcript written on lyx_trial.log.
tex4ht.c (2006-09-13-14:27 kpathsea)
tex4ht -f/lyx_trial.tex
-i/usr/share/texmf/tex4ht/ht-fonts/
-cmozhtf
--- warning --- Can't find/open file `tex4ht.env | .tex4ht'
--- error --- Illegal storage address
t4ht.c (2006-09-13-14:28 kpathsea)
t4ht -f/lyx_trial.tex
-coo
--- warning --- Can't find/open file `tex4ht.env | .tex4ht'
--- warning --- Can't find/open file `lyx_trial.lg'
And, of course, no lyx_trial.odt file. I even did an updatedb and found the
tex4ht.env file (in two places). Finally, executing the following command:
tex4ht oolatex -e/etc/tex4ht/tex4ht.env lyx_trial
appeared to be successful. It created a whole heap of files, but none of them
looked like OpenDoc files. The closest was an XML file with the
extension .4oo, but opening this will oowriter did not yield anything that
looked like a normal document.
I also tried redoing ./configure, make clean, make for LyX 1.5.0beta3 to see
if, after installing tex4ht, it would present me with an OpenDocument export
option. No dice.
Searching the LyX wiki for oolatex yields 0 documents. However, one can find
http://wiki.lyx.org/Tools/LyX2OpenOffice, which recommends ConvLaTeX. Which I
then downloaded and installed. After reading the documentation and
configuring it (it's a bit non-standard...), I finally got it to output a
file, but it was a .sxw (not OpenDoc) and it didn't handle the subscripts and
superscripts correctly anyway. (I even asked OO to save as a .doc file and
opened it in MSWord under Wine, but that didn't show anything useful,
either.)
At this point I'm suspecting there's a really simple answer that I'm missing.
Or there's some weird use-case bug (or Ubuntu-specific issue?) that's causing
me all this grief. I'd be happy to file a bug report, but it seems like I'm
running up against so much weirdness that I hardly know where to start.
> It would, by the way, be very, very easy to write a translating script
> that would take a LaTeX file as export by LyX and convert the offending
> material.
I like that solution, I was considering it myself, and was about to start
writing one when I got your email. Many thanks!
Best,
--Tim
> I've attached a perl script that will do it. Ugly, but mostly
> because of the need to escape $, {, etc. Without the escapes, it's just:
> s/$^{\text{([^}]*)}}/\textsuperscript{$1}/g;
> This will fail if you have "}" in your superscript. (You could obviously
> do the same thing in Python.) Using this, you could write a simple
> script to wrap oolatex (or latex2rtf). On *nix:
> #!/bin/bash
> file=$1;
> cp $file $file.tmp
> perl fixscripts.pl <$file.tmp >$file;
> oolatex $file;
> rm $file.tmp
> Save that where you wish and then change the LaTeX to OpenDocument
> converter, in Tools> Preferences> Converters, to call this rather than
> oolatex directly. Voila.
>
> Richard
<>
Re: 1.5 feature request: textsuperscript & textsubscript
> On Thursday 24 May 2007, Richard Heck wrote: > >> Tim Holy wrote: >> >>> At least in the biological sciences, most journals can't accept LaTeX, >>> and so it's important for us to be able to export to RTF format for final >>> submission of papers. >>> >> Try exporting to OpenDocument. In my experience, oolatex tends to be >> more reliable than latex2rtf, which hasn't seen an update in 2.5 years. >> > That sounds like a good answer to my problem; I'd actually never heard of > oolatex before. I had even spent some time googling for "latex2odf." > It's not exactly got an obvious name. > However, I'm having an unexpected degree of trouble getting oolatex to work. > First, for me neither LyX 1.4.3 nor LyX 1.5.0beta3 gives an OpenDoc option > under its list of export formats. (See the attached screen shot of the export > menu on my machine.) > LyX is looking for oolatex in your path. If it's not there, configure.py won't find it. If it is in your path, then configure.py should find it. Try running LyX from the command line and then reconfiguring. Watch the output for information about oolatex. > So I figured I'd have to export to LaTeX and then run oolatex from the > command > line. Next problem: oolatex does not seem to have a clear "home" on the net, > and doing an "apt-cache search oolatex" under Kubuntu Feisty (even with > universe & multiverse enabled) doesn't come up with anything. I guessed that > under Kubuntu one needs to install tex4ht. Yes, it's part of the tex4ht package. > I then found the oolatex > executable in /usr/share/tex4ht/ (it wasn't placed on the global path). I > added this directory to my path. But then running oolatex resulted in the > following output (note: 29 pages of output! For 2 lines of text?): > [snip] > There's some configuration problem here. On Fedora 6, this just works. Try asking about this on the Ubuntu list, or whatever there is along those lines. rh -- == Richard G Heck, Jr Professor of Philosophy Brown University http://frege.brown.edu/heck/ == Get my public key from http://sks.keyserver.penguin.de Hash: 0x1DE91F1E66FFBDEC Learn how to sign your email using Thunderbird and GnuPG at: http://dudu.dyn.2-h.org/nist/gpg-enigmail-howto
Re: 1.5 feature request: textsuperscript & textsubscript
Tim Holy writes:
> Hello,
>
> At least in the biological sciences, most journals can't accept LaTeX, and so
> it's important for us to be able to export to RTF format for final submission
> of papers. In LyX 1.5.0beta3 (and also in the 1.4 series), exporting to RTF
> works well with a notable exception: super- and subscripts in text. The
> reason for this is that these text superscripts are handled as $^\text{some
> text}$, and latex2rtf doesn't recognize the \text command. Consequently, the
> super and subscripts simply get omitted, which is a problem especially in
> papers that are heavy on chemical formulas...
Notice that OpenOffice is at fault here and not latex2rtf.
By default, latex2rtf uses EQ field codes for translating math constructs
(see http://office.microsoft.com/en-gb/word/HP051861481033.aspx)
but OpenOffice is not able to interpret them.
> An example document is attached. Under LyX 1.5.0beta3, one simply needs to
> export as Rich Text Format and then open the file with OpenOffice to see what
> I'm talking about.
Your example works perfectly when I open the produced rtf in Word.
Maybe you could file an enhancement request to the OO people.
--
Enrico
