On Tue, Dec 24, 2002 at 07:46:28PM +1100, Steven Homolya wrote:
>
>
> Yes there are. After I've discovered I prefer lyx-1.1.* to lyx-1.2.*, I've
> also discovered that I can not downgrade easily because lyx-1.1.* can't read
> lyx-1.2.* docs.
Since there is a difference, I guess I will have to look at some LyX
1.2* docs. I don't want to install 1.2 yet on my system, because
installing anything on linux can take a week. LyX is running real nice
for me right now.
However, I will write an XML file that describes both older and newer
versions of LyX. There will be just one XML file. For example:
<lyx>
<preamble>
<margins left=".5" right="1" top="1" bottom="1"
unit="in"/>
<packages>
<package name="geometry" option1="" option2=""/>
</packages>
</preamble>
<body>
<para layout="Standard">Just an example of a LyX
document expressed in XML format. Here is an example of
an <em>empasized phrase</em>. </para>
</body>
</lyx>
This is the part I will need help with. First, I need to know all of the
necessary elements of a LyX document. For example, every paragraph in LyX
has to have a layout associated with it. Every table must have certain information
about the rows. What else is in a LyX document? Then I will need some help on how
each element actually looks in LyX. For example, "para layout="Standard"> text</para>
gets translated to:
\layout
text
My wish is that future versions of LyX will actually store the
information of a document in XML with full UTF-8 encoding. The lack of
XML support in LyX right now is keeping me from completely embracing it.
>I have written a backward converter which handles paragraph
> styles I use (i.e. it won't work for everyone). Write to me if you want to
> check it out (Do so privately, this list already knows about it and has more
> than enough traffic). As far as I know lyx 1.3 also has its own
> non-backward-compatible format.
Sure, send this along so at least I can get an idea.
>
> What about conversion to tex instead. If you use reasonably standard/simple
> (?) tex, lyx should be able to import it. Some free word processors can
> export in tex format, though not very well...
[snip]
> Ted is _very_ good for reading/writing/editing rtf files; much better than
> staroffice or openoffice, or any other linux office/word-proc. package I've
> tried. You should check out what formats it can export.
The problems with using TeX as a converter is that it doesn't preserve
your styles. For example, you might write a 500 page book in Word. You
have given this document structure by applying styles to every single
paragraph. These styles are analogous to the layouts in LyX. If you
convert the document to TeX and then import it into LyX, you lose your
styles. In order to apply the styles to your document, you have to
manually pull down the layout menu for every one of your 500 paragraphs.
I assume the same limitations apply to Ted. I have used Ted a few times.
I believe it has very limited RTF support, becuase it only converts
those RTF elements that Ted itself can use. Since Ted doesn't have
stylesheets, it does not convert styles. My script gives structure to
virtually every element in RTF.
>
> sounds v. ambitious. Good luck!
I hope not too ambitious! Making a basic conversion is the matter of a
few afternoon's work. Even such a basic conversion would save people who
have written structured documents in Word the tedium of cutting and
pasting, or pulling down styles.
>
> Steve
>
> --
> Steven Homolya
> School of Physics and Materials Engineering
> Monash University VIC 3800
> Australia
> Tel: INT +61 3 9905 3694
> Fax: INT +61 3 9905 3637
--
************************
*Paul Tremblay *
*[EMAIL PROTECTED]*
************************
