José Matos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> Because this feature more or less duplicates with embedding, and if we >> decide to go with .lyz for lyx bundle format, .lyx will always be a >> plain text file. > > I think that the dos time is gone long ago and a lyx suffix should stand > for > lyx files no matter what the internal format used.
You are forcing for no good reason people to use a complicated python binding (you know, the-one-that-nobody-ever-saw) to make the simplest modification on a LyX file, but you are not telling what the reason is. Unix is about simple and predictable things, and I think that LyX should keep that. I do not know of _any_ format that may or may not be compressed. Telling users "you are not supposed to understand how it works, use our sort-of-proprietary bindings instead" is not the correct message. I often read people praising the "simple, text only" format of LyX, and we seem to try to use any possible mean to make .lyx file impossible to handle with the usual swiss army knife tools. > The question is that anyone that changes the lyx file directly knows enough > to know what to do. If (s)he does not know how to use file or any other mean > to determine the file type then it is better not to do it. At lot of people who do not understand the .lyx format, appreciate to be able to change \alpha to \beta throughout the file. JMarc
