Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
>
> Dekel Tsur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> | On Wed, Aug 08, 2001 at 02:30:12PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> | > | The main problem we currently have is that reLyX is almost not
> | > | maintained.
> | >
> | > Then obviously the conversion from latex to lyx is not that
> | > important... at least not important for someone to step up and do the
> | > work.
> |
> | The conversion is important.
to whom? it's obviously that la(tex)->lyx is a nice thing,
but tell me the users who really(!) need this way of
conversion.
> | > | Since we are continuously adding new features to LyX, reLyX stays behind,
> | > | so a lyx->latex->lyx cycle can loose information.
as I said: from a users sight lyx->latex is only important
to find critical errors or to convert some stuff to whatelse
ever.
why should I do a lyx->latex->lyx cycle?
> | > And it probably always will.
> | > LyX _is_ more than a latex editor.
some more information please??
> | I disagree. This cycle should give you identical .lyx files (when you are
> | using a latex document class).
no! for a user it's not important to get the same lyx file.
users are interested in the same output, which is not the
same.
> | > Feel free to provide patches.
> |
> | See above...
>
> no patches there...
:-)
there is no known converter from ???->(La)TeX which works well,
means: it does all!
Herbert
--
http://www.educat.hu-berlin.de/~voss/lyx/
