Yes, if that is possible at all. The Lyx-file would have to be fundamentally different for biblatex files (all bibliography databases go into the header + the bibtex executable may soon no longer work with it).
Another way of doing it would be to: 1. isolate the natbib code and keepmit until at least Lyx 3.0 as a legacy fall-back system. As biblatex should catch natbib, natbib could be fully replaced by Lyx3.0 2. implement full biblatex support 3. other systems -- such as the ABNTstyle stuff which seem to have gone out of production (latets update I can find is from 2003) could then be reimplemented in Biblatex. On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 5:21 PM, Richard Heck <rgh...@comcast.net> wrote: > On 04/24/2011 08:17 PM, Johannes Wilm wrote: > >> It has earlier been discussed to try to work on Biblatex support for >> Lyx2.1. I suggest to go for that. Biblatex seems much better than any of the >> legacy systems. Jurabib has not been developed for years (I believe). I am >> not so sure about natbib. but it also seems on its way out. >> >> Natbib will continue to be supported, I think, if only because people are > so accustomed to it. The best thing we can do here is not so much to add > support for BibLaTeX but somehow to modularize the whole system for handing > bibliographies and such. Then Diego's problem is taken care of at the same > time. > > Richard > > -- Johannes Wilm http://www.johanneswilm.org tel: +1 (520) 399 8880
