> > But the inset presentation will change, right? > > > Only when the document is organized for bundling. And please note that this > can be done externally by a python script such as the one proposed by > Enrico.
But the document is changed. Viewed from another machine, the insets are different. > > The drawbacks are 1. code complicity because the insets need to be > > changed, > > > Not really as most of the copying file changing can be done externally with > a python script. So the code complexity is basically zero. OK. > > and 2. backward compatibility, > > > I don't understand that one. If you talk about losing the original > filenames, yes that's a fact. And this is not a problem? > > 3. change of user's input. > > > Right, but as I said, IU view the bundling business only as a transportable > LyX file. And if you look back at my original proposal, the user won't loose > anything if the original embedded file paths are saved in the session. So this is again not a problem to you? > > I > > mean, if a user craftes a beautiful directory structure, for example > > bib, figure_chap1, figure_chap2, pack it and send it to another > > machine. When he unpacks the file and sees changed insets and > > directory structure, will he be happy? > > > Did you miss the "merge back" part of my proposal? I, as a user, prefer to > first view the change before accepting them. So no problem here as well. On the other machine, the session file is not there. Even on the same machine, the session file can get lost. Basically, why do you want to separate the filename information to a session file? > > I mean, why the KISS structure is the only rightful structure a user > > can have? There are millions of reasons a user wants his own > > structure. > > > And they should be able to keep their structure. I am distinguishing on > purpose the two things. This KISS structure is _only_ about the bundle not a > general way to organize your document of course. Not an another machine, not on the same machine without merging. > I don't follow you, I was talking about limited editing _within_ LyX. LateX > won't call LyX's lfuns AFAIK ;-) > Of course the user will still be free to go the temp directory and edit > the embedded files if he really wants to. That'd be an expert user. When lyx export to latex, the existing latex output may not work when the files are in the temporary directory. Bo
