Outputting LaTeX from XML
Hi all, I've got the conversion programs for Stylz to intermediate XML, and to html and epub. Not a lot of features, but ePubs produced this way are no fatal errors, no errors, no warnings. Next step is to convert the intermediate XML to LaTeX. I'm not interested in xslt or docbook and the like, I mean taking an XML parser (probably Python's xml.etree.ElementTree) to parse the intermediate XML, which has every single bit of the book's information, and outputting LaTeX. If anybody has experience doing this, please email me offlist. Thanks, SteveT Steve Litt June 2018 featured book: Twenty Eight Tales of Troubleshooting http://www.troubleshooters.com/28
Re: The tortured release of 2.3.0 Windows binaries
I may be wrong but my understanding of the discussion is that we are moving towards a situation where LyX can only be installed if the latest MikTeX is or has been installed. If this is so, then I have some doubts whether this is wise and practical: 2018-05-14 11:08 GMT+02:00 Bernt Lie : > A slight update on my indicated procedure in #2: I am, of course, no > developer and no computer scientist. So let me indicate some understanding > also for decisions made on things I don't understand. > > Suppose... updating MikTeX leads to the following: > * the latest MikTeX is not backwards compatible, i.e., documents that used > to work stop working -- that would be a pain for the guy who provides the > Windows installation, > * installing the latest MikTeX leads to wiping out currently installed > templates, etc. for journals, conferences, etc., so that these must be > reinstalled -- probably something that some people would find a pain, and > bitch about, > * installing the latest MikTeX has proved to be problematic for some > versions of Windows (e.g., some users tend to prefer Windows 7 and refuse > to update to Windows 10, etc., etc.). > > Precisely for these and similar reasons, it is not wise to require updating MikTeX to the latest one. The latest one is usually not the one that was current at the time LyX was compiled and the installer created. So we can never guarantee that LyX works with the latest MikTeX, and therefore we should not require updating to the latest one. Instead the procedure followed until 2.2.3 works always. That is: there are two installers. The first one installs only LyX, and it is up to the user to ensure that he has a working and compatible TeX installation, whether that is the latest MikTeX, an earlier MikTeX, TeX Live, or another one. The second one installs LyX + MikTeX; users choosing this installer should be warned that LyX may cease to work correctly, if they update or otherwise change the MikTeX installation, and that MikTex should remain frozen. Moreover there is now a TeX Live distribution for Windows, and if we require MikTeX (that is, if the installer refuses to install unless MikTeX is installed), this would be a great barrier to users who favor TeX Live. > In summary: I understand some caution if the guy who provides the Windows > installation may come in a situation that makes many users "mad". That is > never a good situation. > I agree. Requiring to update to the latest MikTeX could possibly lead to a lot of questions to the maintainer. Cheers, Kees
Re: The tortured release of 2.3.0 Windows binaries
On 05/14/2018 05:08 AM, Bernt Lie wrote: > A slight update on my indicated procedure in #2: I am, of course, no > developer and no computer scientist. So let me indicate some understanding > also for decisions made on things I don't understand. > > Suppose... updating MikTeX leads to the following: > * the latest MikTeX is not backwards compatible, i.e., documents that used to > work stop working -- that would be a pain for the guy who provides the > Windows installation, > * installing the latest MikTeX leads to wiping out currently installed > templates, etc. for journals, conferences, etc., so that these must be > reinstalled -- probably something that some people would find a pain, and > bitch about, > * installing the latest MikTeX has proved to be problematic for some versions > of Windows (e.g., some users tend to prefer Windows 7 and refuse to update to > Windows 10, etc., etc.). > > In summary: I understand some caution if the guy who provides the Windows > installation may come in a situation that makes many users "mad". That is > never a good situation. > > However, if there are no problems, for me it would be perfectly fine if the > installation procedure checked the current installation of MikTeX, and if I > didn't have the correct one installed, simply informed me: > > * "LyX v. 2.3.0 requires the latest installation of MikTeX. You have not > installed the latest version on your computer, and the installation is > therefore terminated. > > If you want to upgrade to LyX v. 2.3.0, please follow the procedure at > www. and first upgrade MikTeX to the latest version. NOTE: if you choose > to upgrade MikTeX, and there are some problems with MikTeX on your computer, > you do this on your own responsibility." > > Or something to that effect... As Scott more or less said about a different proposal, this goes way beyond the compromise that the other developers had proposed to Uwe. Our suggestion was simply to warn the user at the outset that MikTeX *would* be upgraded as part of the install, and to offer them the opportunity to cancel the install if they don't want the upgrade to happen. Uwe refused, and has refused again in the last couple days. His view is that this kind of warning will confuse some users and that those same users are at risk of having broken installations if we do not do the upgrade for them. So his view is that we should do the upgrade silently. I find it hard to understand this point of view, but that is what Uwe thinks, so we are at stalemate. I am working on building a Windows installer myself, but since I haven't used Windows in fifteen years or so, it's taking me a bit of time to get up to speed. I think I'm getting close, but I've been thinking that for a while. Riki
Re: Testing
Got it, Wolfgang Am 14.05.2018 um 12:35 schrieb Baris Erkus: My e-mails do not appear in the list. This is a test. Sorry... BE.
Re: KMM 5.0.0 in Magaia 6
Michael, thanks for the reports. Please make sure to use a version based on the 5.0.1 released tar-ball. Unfortunately, the version that is printed by KMyMoney in the about box has not been updated so it is a bit harder to distinguish from a real 5.0.0 version. Please use https://kmymoney.org/release-notes.php to check what has already been fixed between 5.0.0 and 5.0.1 to avoid reporting more duplicates. Thanks in advance Thomas On Montag, 14. Mai 2018 12:30:54 CEST Michael Berger wrote: > Hello Thomas, > > I am very sorry for my below repeated premature statement re KMM 5.0.0 > > After digging deeper I must now advise Mageia 6 users to be extremely > cautious when trying KMM 5.0.0. > I continue using it for my everyday work while avoiding the dangerous > parts/commands of it. > > Thomas, as I am rather busy right now I will report my findings to you > in a couple of days. > > Again, very sorry for being too hasty, > Michael > > - > > Hello Thomas, > > I upgraded KMM to version 5.0.0 and I am back in business after having > to do some minor corrections re foreign currency exchange rates. > > My base currency is the EURO. Currencies like the Swiss Franc and others > showed correct exchange rates that did not need any adjustment. But the > exchange rates of currencies with an extrem splay like the € to IDR (1€ > ~ 16 500 IDR) returned large crazy figures that made no sense at all. > But then it was easy to make the necessary corrections in KMM's Price > Editor. > > I increased the default precision setting to eight digits, e.g. 1 IDR > equals 0,6001 €. > > The Price Editor is now back to presenting the online quotes as before - > special thanks for this great add-in feature! > > Should I come across some other imperfections I will report them to you > (but so far it doesn't look like). > > I am using Mageia 6 > > Thanks again for the great program and best regards, > Michael > > -- Regards Thomas Baumgart https://www.telegram.org/ Telegram, the better WhatsApp - 'Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it.' - Brian W. Kernighan - signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Testing
My e-mails do not appear in the list. This is a test. Sorry... BE.
Re: The tortured release of 2.3.0 Windows binaries
I do not why mails do not appear. I am sending again.. On 13-May-18 3:16 PM, Bernt Lie wrote: 1: I agree, and I didn't say so. Essentially, my point is that developers can not do that without compromising its OS agnostics. For various reasons, I use Windows myself. And I have full respect for others making different choices. I don't think the LyX list should be used for negative description of OSes not used by oneself. 2: I see the point. If there are no negative side effects of upgrading to the latest version of MikTeX, I'd do the following: * Put in a LyX 2.3.0 installation link. * Start by checking if the latest MikTeX version is installed. If yes, proceed and install LyX 2.3.0 * If not, explain why, and point to a link (youtube, or whatever) on how the user can upgrade MikTeX and say "retry after you have upgraded MikTeX". Maybe a solution? B I have sent an e-mail a while back and told my experience with the current LyX approach and how problematic it is if one tries to update Miktex while running LyX setup program. I have tried it several times but never worked for me. I have recommended the above approach (or smtg similar) as well. In my opinion, developers should not put their valuable time into what they are doing right now; instead they should proceed with the above approach (which seems easier to implement) and concentrate on making LyX more compatible with MikTeXs current and future releases. (Sorry if what I said does not make sense as I am not a programmer.)
KMM 5.0.0 in Magaia 6
Hello Thomas, I am very sorry for my below repeated premature statement re KMM 5.0.0 After digging deeper I must now advise Mageia 6 users to be extremely cautious when trying KMM 5.0.0. I continue using it for my everyday work while avoiding the dangerous parts/commands of it. Thomas, as I am rather busy right now I will report my findings to you in a couple of days. Again, very sorry for being too hasty, Michael - Hello Thomas, I upgraded KMM to version 5.0.0 and I am back in business after having to do some minor corrections re foreign currency exchange rates. My base currency is the EURO. Currencies like the Swiss Franc and others showed correct exchange rates that did not need any adjustment. But the exchange rates of currencies with an extrem splay like the € to IDR (1€ ~ 16 500 IDR) returned large crazy figures that made no sense at all. But then it was easy to make the necessary corrections in KMM's Price Editor. I increased the default precision setting to eight digits, e.g. 1 IDR equals 0,6001 €. The Price Editor is now back to presenting the online quotes as before - special thanks for this great add-in feature! Should I come across some other imperfections I will report them to you (but so far it doesn't look like). I am using Mageia 6 Thanks again for the great program and best regards, Michael
RE: The tortured release of 2.3.0 Windows binaries
A slight update on my indicated procedure in #2: I am, of course, no developer and no computer scientist. So let me indicate some understanding also for decisions made on things I don't understand. Suppose... updating MikTeX leads to the following: * the latest MikTeX is not backwards compatible, i.e., documents that used to work stop working -- that would be a pain for the guy who provides the Windows installation, * installing the latest MikTeX leads to wiping out currently installed templates, etc. for journals, conferences, etc., so that these must be reinstalled -- probably something that some people would find a pain, and bitch about, * installing the latest MikTeX has proved to be problematic for some versions of Windows (e.g., some users tend to prefer Windows 7 and refuse to update to Windows 10, etc., etc.). In summary: I understand some caution if the guy who provides the Windows installation may come in a situation that makes many users "mad". That is never a good situation. However, if there are no problems, for me it would be perfectly fine if the installation procedure checked the current installation of MikTeX, and if I didn't have the correct one installed, simply informed me: * "LyX v. 2.3.0 requires the latest installation of MikTeX. You have not installed the latest version on your computer, and the installation is therefore terminated. If you want to upgrade to LyX v. 2.3.0, please follow the procedure at www. and first upgrade MikTeX to the latest version. NOTE: if you choose to upgrade MikTeX, and there are some problems with MikTeX on your computer, you do this on your own responsibility." Or something to that effect... -B -Original Message- From: lyx-users@lists.lyx.org On Behalf Of Steve Litt Sent: Monday, May 14, 2018 10:55 To: lyx-users@lists.lyx.org Subject: Re: The tortured release of 2.3.0 Windows binaries On Mon, 14 May 2018 06:58:30 + Baris Erkus wrote: > On 13-May-18 3:16 PM, Bernt Lie wrote: > 1: I agree, and I didn't say so. Essentially, my point is that > developers can not do that without compromising its OS agnostics. For > various reasons, I use Windows myself. And I have full respect for > others making different choices. I don't think the LyX list should be > used for negative description of OSes not used by oneself. > > 2: I see the point. If there are no negative side effects of upgrading > to the latest version of MikTeX, I'd do the following: > * Put in a LyX 2.3.0 installation link. > * Start by checking if the latest MikTeX version is installed. If yes, > proceed and install LyX 2.3.0 > * If not, explain why, and point to a link (youtube, or whatever) on > how the user can upgrade MikTeX and say "retry after you have upgraded > MikTeX". > > Maybe a solution? > B Your plan outlined in point #2 above seems like a great idea to me. Disclaimer: I don't use Windows, so I might not know the full extent of the problem. SteveT
Re: The tortured release of 2.3.0 Windows binaries
On Mon, 14 May 2018 06:58:30 + Baris Erkus wrote: > On 13-May-18 3:16 PM, Bernt Lie wrote: > 1: I agree, and I didn't say so. Essentially, my point is that > developers can not do that without compromising its OS agnostics. For > various reasons, I use Windows myself. And I have full respect for > others making different choices. I don't think the LyX list should be > used for negative description of OSes not used by oneself. > > 2: I see the point. If there are no negative side effects of > upgrading to the latest version of MikTeX, I'd do the following: > * Put in a LyX 2.3.0 installation link. > * Start by checking if the latest MikTeX version is installed. If > yes, proceed and install LyX 2.3.0 > * If not, explain why, and point to a link (youtube, or whatever) on > how the user can upgrade MikTeX and say "retry after you have > upgraded MikTeX". > > Maybe a solution? > B Your plan outlined in point #2 above seems like a great idea to me. Disclaimer: I don't use Windows, so I might not know the full extent of the problem. SteveT
