On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 09:42:41PM +0300, Razvan Sandu wrote:
> Objective: to use Lyx as a part of a mechanism for producing
> documents, quickly exportable as .pdf, .ps and HTML files,
> *in Romanian language* (which uses the ISO 8859-2 set). So I try to use
> SGML as the most "universal" language available.
Being Czech (and thus using frequnetly ISO 8859-2 myself), I believe,
that using SGML when you are not sure is not the best thing to do. plain
LaTeX is perfectly capable to produces documents in good HTML, not
saying about PDF and PS which are always perfect (when LyX is setup
well). By using SGML you are creating just another level of complexity,
which leads to higher difficulty of operation and thus to unsatisfactory
results (maybe you don't know it, but SGML is translated in .fot format,
which is translated into a kind of LaTeX, which is then translated into
PS/PDF). LaTeX itself is perfectly capable produce perfect Eastern
European documents.
Conclusion: if you do not need SGML, then you probably do not want it.
If you really do need it, find some complex documents explaining how to
do it and learn it all hard way (i.e., first by creating documents in
plain text editor, converting them via JadeTeX to PS/PDF). Then add LyX
on top of that. I do not want to say, that LyX is useless for SGML - I
believe that it may greatly simplify production of documents even there.
But setting up whole machinery is not totally intuitive yet, and you
should learn a lot (maybe too much) before making it work. These are my
experiences accquired when trying to do it myself. Maybe, that in very
close future SGML (DocBook) will bury all LaTeX, but I am afraid, that
we are not there yet (and it is not problem of LyX, but in the
underdevelopment of SGML/XML capable tools). Which is nothing against
all good programmers, who are working (and probably using) support of
SGML in LyX, but it is sad statement about my experiences and current
situation.
Happy LyXing
Matej
