Am Mittwoch, 25. Juli 2001 19:23 schrieb Dekel Tsur:
> We already discussed this: LyX doesn't support the default naming
> scheme of bibtopic since it might lead to confusion when the user has
> filename.lyx and filename2.lyx, and he doesn't use tempdir.
> If you think that the above situation is rare enough, it is easy to
> support the default naming scheme (with or without the dot naming
> scheme). But is it that hard to use the dot option ?
I know, I changed my mind more than once on this topic, but after all I
think there's no problem using the dot option by default, since you
could prevent problems, as Dekel mentioned. I have enabled bibtopic
support in 1.1.6fix2 and fix3 by myself and work with this feature alot
since then and I am quite happy with it. I think the worst case that
could happen (from my point of view) is that the support will not go
into 1.2.0 because you don't come to a decision here.
BTW: The whole dot thing itself is a workaround in the bibtopic package
and the dotless version has strange historical reasons. Let me quote
the bibtopic documentation:
"This naming scheme [the dot-one] was used in the old bibtopics.sty, so
you may use the dot option for full compatibility with the old naming
scheme [footnote: The additional dot was omitted in the current version
for compatibility reasons with certain OSes that don't support multiple
dots in filenames.]" (p. 7)
On another page, there's a note which exactly points out the problems
Dekel mentiones with the dotless scheme. So, if even the bibtopic
developers themselves are that unshure about the naming scheme, why
shouldn't LyX decide to use the safer one? Or is an M$-DOS version
planned? ;-)
Thanks,
Jürgen (who's talking too much today instead of doing his paid work).
