Georg Baum wrote:
No. The master graphics is used as master for everything. Consider the following situation: The LyX file includes a figure "a.xyz". Converters exist from xyz -> eps and xyz -> png. The .tex file contains always \includegraphics{a} (actually almost always, if you want to know the details read http://www.lyx.org/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/lyx-devel/src/insets/insetgraphics.C?rev=HEAD&content-type=text/vnd.viewcvs-markup, look for prepareFile). When you export to pdf using pdflatex, the file a.png is created. When you export to ps, the file a.eps is created. a.xyz is always the master, not only for preview, but also for export. Of course there may be the special case that xyz = pdf or xyz = eps etc. BTW, I am talking about LyX 1.4 here, it is slightly different in 1.3.
Just how "slightly" different? Because I have this terrible feeling I wasted much time on unecessary things. Coming from lyx-less pdflatex, I always kept .eps and .pdf-variants of the same graphics. The Lyx (1.3.5) extended-features guide seems to say the same thing: "5.3.6.1 Use pdfLaTeX
With pdfLaTeX you need to convert your eps figures to PDF". And on the wiki page ("How LyX handles figures") talk is about preview only.
In contrast, the way you describe it, it sounds wonderful: Skip the manual pdf-graphics-creation and just have lyx/imagemagick create the necessary png's on the fly. Just need one .eps (like in the old days...). That is/would be great!
Which one? The one I suggested about relyx and then tex2lyx (and that doesn't exist yet)?
The fact that tex2lyx creates an additional ERT for \bibliographystyle that should be deleted.
I meant: which wiki page should it be added to? -sven
