On 26/05/2011 10:26 p.m., Julio Rojas wrote:
Just what does bold-italic-numbered-size 14-roman actually mean in
the specific context in which it occurs; in one document it might be
a procedural rendition of a section head but in another the same
author might intend it to be emphasis (rendered simply as bold).
This is the exact question one should answer before asking why what
Andrew wants is not the best path to follow. Obviously, Andrew's
documents follow some layout specifically designed for some journal, so
for him this answer is straighforward. Nonetheless, for Lyx it doesn't
matter, as it will be impossible to get this information from the PDF.
BTW, Andrew, how did you manage to copy from a PDF and pasting on
Abiword keeping the format? I was curious, so I tried with a simple PDF,
but it only pasted plain text.
Regards.
-------------------------------------------------
Julio Rojas
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
I'm working in Windows, so it was Ctrl-A, Ctrl-C in the pdf, then Ctrl-V
in Abiword. Voila! Text with underlining, bold and italics (emphasis)
preserved.
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 12:05 PM, Trevor Jenkins <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 10:31 AM, Julio Rojas <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Making some text as Bold-Italic-Numbered-Size 14-Roman can be
done in Lyx, but it is much better to say that such text is in a
Section environment, because when changes on the document style
are made, you only have to make them once, and not throughout
the document, at every instance of said format. Finger painting,
what you need, is not the way to go in Lyx/Latex. It should be
avoided like the plague.
I hope you see the need for this approach. Regards.
Many years ago (a couple of decades at least) there was a paper
presented at a SigDoc conference, I think it was, on some initial
attempts to infer structural markup from procedural. This project
must have been sometime in the late 1980s (certainly post 1986 and
the ISO's publication of ISO 8879 SGML) and the early 1990s. I place
it in that time frame because of SGML being an International
Standard and the governmental procurement processes that mandate the
use of standards over ad hoc solutions, which procedural markup is,
and system suppliers not wishing to lose business because they could
deal with the new published standard. At this moment I can't lay my
hands on my copy of those proceedings but I do recall that the
procedural editor being used was WPS-PLUS.
Although I was never involved in that project it did appear to be a
sensible way to convert from old-fashioned procedural to modern
structural markup. I jotted down some OPS-5-like rules in an attempt
to create an expert system that would ease this conversion. And in
moments of craziness return to them adding more and more special
cases to cover how people use procedural stuff. I also got stuck on
the input phase of dealing with the multiplicity of formats being
spewed out by Microsoft Word let alone all the other proprietary
word processing and DTP formats that exist.
Some one else tried a similar project that converted groff/troff
files from a limited set of ms/mm/etc macros to a more structural
form. It may also have included some TeX conversion too. This would
also have been in the early 1990s. I thought it was Eric Raymond but
there's nothing on his web site about it now. My memory is that the
person abandoned the task quite quickly because of the complexity of
the task. Just what does bold-italic-numbered-size 14-roman actually
mean in the specific context in which it occurs; in one document it
might be a procedural rendition of a section head but in another the
same author might intend it to be emphasis (rendered simply as bold).
However, there is a solution to the original poster's request.
Include all the original markup from the pasted in document under a
TeX escape. It won't be pretty and as with the work-arounds already
being used will require manual intervention to convert to LaTeX's
pseudo structural markup scheme.
Regards, Trevor.
<>< Re: deemed!
These have been interesting responses. I was unaware of the complexity
of the issue. In fact I'm not after minutely detailed reproduction of
the original character style -- fingerpainting -- but was hoping that
emphasised text in the original might be preserved as emphasised text
after pasting, the same for bolding, as it is in Word, Abiword, Open
Office, irrespective of what happens to the font, text size and so on.
Andrew
