Re: Steve Litt's gripes against LyX and Docbook
On Tuesday 18 January 2005 06:01 pm, Matej Cepl wrote: > Steve Litt wrote: > > * At this point, now that I'm satisfied with the LyX native format, what > > would be my advantage in outputting to xml? > > Using a standard _document_ format (which LaTeX is not) with long-term > storing availability (http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~mgk25/publ-tips/#make). Will > you have LyX in twenty years? I am not sure (however, it will be succesful > in next five or so), but I am quite sure that you will have some tools to > process standard XML (like Docbook XML). Ah-ha! The "Who Owns Your Data" rationale. That's why I switched to Linux: http://www.troubleshooters.com/tpromag/200104/200104.htm That's an excellent reason, and I'll investigate archiving my books in XML format. Secondarily, I'll archive them as LyX native format, on the theory that LyX native format is so human and machine readable that as long as there's Perl (or Python :-), I can convert them to any other format I want. I really want to thank the LyX crew for making sure the native format is simple human readable ascii. That was a major factor in my choice of LyX. Thanks Matej, SteveT Steve Litt Author: * Universal Troubleshooting Process courseware * Troubleshooting Techniques of the Successful Technologist * Rapid Learning: Secret Weapon of the Successful Technologist Webmaster * Troubleshooters.Com * http://www.troubleshooters.com
Re: Steve Litt's gripes against LyX and Docbook
Steve Litt wrote: > * At this point, now that I'm satisfied with the LyX native format, what > would be my advantage in outputting to xml? Using a standard _document_ format (which LaTeX is not) with long-term storing availability (http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~mgk25/publ-tips/#make). Will you have LyX in twenty years? I am not sure (however, it will be succesful in next five or so), but I am quite sure that you will have some tools to process standard XML (like Docbook XML). > * Are any of you planning on outputting to xml? So far, I am more playing with the idea (and keeping my eye open for the further development of OpenOffice.org, which looks like that it may be promising sometime down the road) than doing anything serious. Matej -- Matej Cepl, http://www.ceplovi.cz/matej GPG Finger: 89EF 4BC6 288A BF43 1BAB 25C3 E09F EF25 D964 84AC 138 Highland Ave. #10, Somerville, Ma 02143, (617) 623-1488 Give your heartache to him. (1Pt 5,7; Mt 11:28-30)
Re: Steve Litt's gripes against LyX and Docbook
On Tuesday 18 January 2005 02:36 pm, Jose' Matos wrote: > On Friday 14 January 2005 22:24, Matej Cepl wrote: > > Hi, > > > > while reading a Steve Litt's column on writing technical books > > (http://www.troubleshooters.com/tpromag/200201/200201.htm) I found this: > > > > This is not completely correct. If you don't need BibTeX (I do), then you > > can pretty easily create Docbook XML from SGML Docbook with the attached > > script (you have to run it in the same directory as the original LyX > > file. You can even define Docbook XML as new format in LyX and define > > conversion for it (see attached screenshot of its definition). It is very > > rough and probably buggy, but it may work at least partially. However, > > then the answer is what to do with Docbook XML file and it is not simple > > either. > > > > Comments? > > lyx 1.4.0 will write directly xml or sgml on demand, you ask. :-) Great! Here are some more questions: * At this point, now that I'm satisfied with the LyX native format, what would be my advantage in outputting to xml? * Is the xml option round trip, or is xml just another export? * Are any of you planning on outputting to xml? By the way, my January 2002 article was less a gripe and more of a reason why I couldn't have used LyX to frontend docbook. Continuing my 2001 evaluation, I eventually decided that LyX's native format would fit in almost perfectly with my business, and adopted LyX. I'm now in the process of writing my second complete book using LyX. Thanks SteveT Steve Litt Author: * Universal Troubleshooting Process courseware * Troubleshooting Techniques of the Successful Technologist * Rapid Learning: Secret Weapon of the Successful Technologist Webmaster * Troubleshooters.Com * http://www.troubleshooters.com
Re: Steve Litt's gripes against LyX and Docbook
On Friday 14 January 2005 22:24, Matej Cepl wrote: > Hi, > > while reading a Steve Litt's column on writing technical books > (http://www.troubleshooters.com/tpromag/200201/200201.htm) I found this: > > This is not completely correct. If you don't need BibTeX (I do), then you > can pretty easily create Docbook XML from SGML Docbook with the attached > script (you have to run it in the same directory as the original LyX > file. You can even define Docbook XML as new format in LyX and define > conversion for it (see attached screenshot of its definition). It is very > rough and probably buggy, but it may work at least partially. However, > then the answer is what to do with Docbook XML file and it is not simple > either. > > Comments? lyx 1.4.0 will write directly xml or sgml on demand, you ask. :-) Certainly if you have ert in sgml that not valid xml then you are in trouble, but this is the same with lyx and tex constructs when working with the latex backend. (Yes Richard, I know the difference between the backend and frontends ;-). Was this the comment you were waiting for? :-) > Best, > > Matej -- Josà AbÃlio
Re: Steve Litt's gripes against LyX and Docbook
Matej Cepl wrote: > Comments? I can't comment on the ability of the script to do the task you set it, but here's some comments on the script itself: Isn't "function" a bash-ism? You can just use "lyxvalue" here. function lyxvalue() You should enclose $2 in double quotes. It might contain spaces. STRING=$(grep "^$1" $(basename $2 .sgml).lyx) Some explanation of what the function does wouldn't help... Quote $1 and $OUTPUT: lyxvalue inputencoding $1 lenc2enc $OUTPUT While we're at it, I think you should quote all of your $FOO because they all derive from the input arguments. Your sed script might be a little more readable if you used single quotes rather than double quotes. Using multiple -e commands to a single sed is much more efficent than multiple invocations of sed. Finally, I do believe you're guilty of a "useless use of cat". Does this not do what you want? | sed -e '1c\ \ http://www.oasis-open.org/docbook/xml/4.1.2/docbookx.dtd"; [\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ ]>\ \ ' \ -e '/^\s*$/d' \ -e 's/\s*\n\s*<\//<\//' Having said that, '\s' is a GNU-ism anyway. If you want others to use your script, use [ TAB] where TAB is a tab character. Your final s-command might be more readable if you used different delimiters. Eg s@@@ rather than s/// : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Steve Litt's gripes against LyX and Docbook
Hi, while reading a Steve Litt's column on writing technical books (http://www.troubleshooters.com/tpromag/200201/200201.htm) I found this: But Docbook had its own problems. I could have used Emacs to front end my Docbook, but I don't know Emacs and have had trouble trying to learn it. LyX can front end only the SGML version of Docbook, and I wanted to use the XML Docbook representation, so a LyX front end for Docbook was unsuitable for me. Most other Docbook front ends required tag coding, which is a productivity killer for a writer. The moment you switch your focus to coding a tag, you forget the idea about which you were writing. Ughhh! This is not completely correct. If you don't need BibTeX (I do), then you can pretty easily create Docbook XML from SGML Docbook with the attached script (you have to run it in the same directory as the original LyX file. You can even define Docbook XML as new format in LyX and define conversion for it (see attached screenshot of its definition). It is very rough and probably buggy, but it may work at least partially. However, then the answer is what to do with Docbook XML file and it is not simple either. Comments? Best, Matej -- Matej Cepl, http://www.ceplovi.cz/matej GPG Finger: 89EF 4BC6 288A BF43 1BAB 25C3 E09F EF25 D964 84AC 138 Highland Ave. #10, Somerville, Ma 02143, (617) 623-1488 I love deadlines. I like the whooshing sound they make as they fly by. -- Douglas Adams dbxmlfix Description: application/shellscript <>
