Re: LyX --> markdown
Whoops. I meant "Thibaut". I keep putting the "l" in there On 8/18/20 9:49 PM, Richard Kimberly Heck wrote: > On 8/18/20 11:31 AM, Steve Litt wrote: >> On Tue, 18 Aug 2020 16:49:14 +0200 >> Saša Janiška wrote: >> >>> On Tue, 18 Aug 2020 03:05:21 -0400 >>> Steve Litt wrote: >>> One man's opinion: If you don't need write once display everywhere, use LyX for PDF and Bluefish for HTML. >>> Bluefish is still alive? Amazing! >>> Life will be much simpler, and your HTML will be much less junkified. >>> I still think about the possibility to write Markdown and use ConteXt >>> for high-quality typesetting. Have you ever used it? >> No. If I were writing Markdown, I'd use Vim or Emacs or Bluefish. That >> way I'd have complete control of what little semantic distinctions >> Markdown gives me. >> >> In my opinion, using LyX to write HTML that isn't intended to also be >> written to PDF is like using a fine woodworking knife to cut 2x4" beams >> to length. > LyX at least has a "write once export anywhere" ambition, though we are > some ways from realizing that, to be sure. But...LyX 2.4 will have much > improved DocBook output, thanks to our new contributor Thibault. > Basically, he has made it possible for ANY document to be output as > DocBook (much as any document can be output as HTML). At least some of > the work Thibault has done will improve the HTML output. But, as I've > said before, the main problem we have with that is simply that no one > has felt sufficiently motivated to do the work to improve it. The hard > work, to produce the infrastructure, has all been done. What's left is > fine-tuning, but since I almost never use HTML export myself, I haven't > felt compelled to do that work. > > A much larger project, though probably not that hard at this point, > would actually unify the HTML and DocBook output routines, to the extent > that is possible, and use configuration files to tell us how to output > various constructs. Then it would not be very hard to export Markdown > natively, or any other format one wished. But again, person-hours are, > as with most open source projects, in short supply. > > Riki > > -- lyx-users mailing list lyx-users@lists.lyx.org http://lists.lyx.org/mailman/listinfo/lyx-users
Re: LyX --> markdown
On 8/18/20 10:49 AM, Saša Janiška wrote: > On Tue, 18 Aug 2020 03:05:21 -0400 > Steve Litt wrote: > >> One man's opinion: If you don't need write once display everywhere, >> use LyX for PDF and Bluefish for HTML. > Bluefish is still alive? Amazing! I confess I am still using Quanta Plus for HTML/PHP coding, even though it has not been updated in who knows how long. I'm forgetting why I never warmed to Bluefish (which I tried for a while). Riki -- lyx-users mailing list lyx-users@lists.lyx.org http://lists.lyx.org/mailman/listinfo/lyx-users
Re: LyX --> markdown
On 8/18/20 11:31 AM, Steve Litt wrote: > On Tue, 18 Aug 2020 16:49:14 +0200 > Saša Janiška wrote: > >> On Tue, 18 Aug 2020 03:05:21 -0400 >> Steve Litt wrote: >> >>> One man's opinion: If you don't need write once display everywhere, >>> use LyX for PDF and Bluefish for HTML. >> Bluefish is still alive? Amazing! >> >>> Life will be much simpler, and your HTML will be much less >>> junkified. >> I still think about the possibility to write Markdown and use ConteXt >> for high-quality typesetting. Have you ever used it? > No. If I were writing Markdown, I'd use Vim or Emacs or Bluefish. That > way I'd have complete control of what little semantic distinctions > Markdown gives me. > > In my opinion, using LyX to write HTML that isn't intended to also be > written to PDF is like using a fine woodworking knife to cut 2x4" beams > to length. LyX at least has a "write once export anywhere" ambition, though we are some ways from realizing that, to be sure. But...LyX 2.4 will have much improved DocBook output, thanks to our new contributor Thibault. Basically, he has made it possible for ANY document to be output as DocBook (much as any document can be output as HTML). At least some of the work Thibault has done will improve the HTML output. But, as I've said before, the main problem we have with that is simply that no one has felt sufficiently motivated to do the work to improve it. The hard work, to produce the infrastructure, has all been done. What's left is fine-tuning, but since I almost never use HTML export myself, I haven't felt compelled to do that work. A much larger project, though probably not that hard at this point, would actually unify the HTML and DocBook output routines, to the extent that is possible, and use configuration files to tell us how to output various constructs. Then it would not be very hard to export Markdown natively, or any other format one wished. But again, person-hours are, as with most open source projects, in short supply. Riki -- lyx-users mailing list lyx-users@lists.lyx.org http://lists.lyx.org/mailman/listinfo/lyx-users
Re: LyX --> markdown
On Tue, 18 Aug 2020 16:49:14 +0200 Saša Janiška wrote: > On Tue, 18 Aug 2020 03:05:21 -0400 > Steve Litt wrote: > > > One man's opinion: If you don't need write once display everywhere, > > use LyX for PDF and Bluefish for HTML. > > Bluefish is still alive? Amazing! > > > Life will be much simpler, and your HTML will be much less > > junkified. > > I still think about the possibility to write Markdown and use ConteXt > for high-quality typesetting. Have you ever used it? No. If I were writing Markdown, I'd use Vim or Emacs or Bluefish. That way I'd have complete control of what little semantic distinctions Markdown gives me. In my opinion, using LyX to write HTML that isn't intended to also be written to PDF is like using a fine woodworking knife to cut 2x4" beams to length. SteveT Steve Litt Autumn 2020 featured book: Thriving in Tough Times http://www.troubleshooters.com/thrive -- lyx-users mailing list lyx-users@lists.lyx.org http://lists.lyx.org/mailman/listinfo/lyx-users
Re: LyX --> markdown
On Tue, 18 Aug 2020 03:05:21 -0400 Steve Litt wrote: > One man's opinion: If you don't need write once display everywhere, > use LyX for PDF and Bluefish for HTML. Bluefish is still alive? Amazing! > Life will be much simpler, and your HTML will be much less junkified. I still think about the possibility to write Markdown and use ConteXt for high-quality typesetting. Have you ever used it? Sincerely, Gour -- One must deliver himself with the help of his mind, and not degrade himself. The mind is the friend of the conditioned soul, and his enemy as well. -- lyx-users mailing list lyx-users@lists.lyx.org http://lists.lyx.org/mailman/listinfo/lyx-users
Re: LyX --> markdown
On Sun, 16 Aug 2020 10:46:04 +0200 Saša Janiška wrote: > I do *not* want HTML & PDF for the same document, but want to use the > *same* editor for creating both HTML content (to be pasted into Tiki > CMS) as well as PDF for everything else. ;) One man's opinion: If you don't need write once display everywhere, use LyX for PDF and Bluefish for HTML. Life will be much simpler, and your HTML will be much less junkified. SteveT Steve Litt Autumn 2020 featured book: Thriving in Tough Times http://www.troubleshooters.com/thrive -- lyx-users mailing list lyx-users@lists.lyx.org http://lists.lyx.org/mailman/listinfo/lyx-users
