"Bo Peng" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > While I think your choice of XML syntax is practical, I still have > some concerns. In the LONG run, what export/convert formats do you > have in mind? This will directly influence our choice of lyx format. > For example, if we aim at ODF, we should design a format as close to > it as possible. Also, the adoption of MathML seems important.
To have a document format that is close to ODF, we would have to change LyX internal structure and semantics to fit that. This is outside of the scope of 1.6 IMO. And using a file format that is not a 1-to-1 image of our internal representation looks like a very very bad idea. In short, I think that the file format is not what will make us magically more compatible with ODF, so why bother? JMarc
