José Matos wrote:
Where do you think that LyX needs more attention?
I'm inclined to think that maybe 2.0 should do two main things: (i)
introduce the XML file format and (ii) concentrate mostly on increasing
stability, dealing with minor sorts of UI bugs (like the math toolbar
thing), and cleaning up the code. We did so much in 1.6. Maybe it's time
to rest a bit in the "new feature" category and let the code
mature---though I know the new features are the fun part.
What feature do you think that LyX is missing badly?
As Bo said, a layout editor would be really nice. The alleged difficulty
of creating layouts is one of the most common user complaints. I don't
myself know that a simple layout editor would actually help that much. I
think the main problem is understanding what all the various settings
do---and being willing to experiment---but at least if we had one it
would motivate people to try more than they apparently do, even if it
was very simple. And then we could build on that.
I also think the move toward user-definable insets, with InsetFlex, is
important, and that it'd be nice to do the same thing with
InsetCommand-type insets. Similarly, it'd be nice to have real support
for paragraph layouts (command and environment) with arguments, and to
be able to have InsetCollapsable-type insets that take arguments, both
required and optional. That's not so much "badly", but it's often requested.
Finally, BibLaTeX is surely near 1.0 status, and it'd be nice to have
real support for it.
Where do you intend to work during this development cycle?
I'll give some attention to the BibLaTeX issue when I get a chance. I'm
hoping Jurgen will give me lots of advice. ;-) I'd also like to move us
from prettyref, which has known problems, to refstyle or some similar
package. I may also do some work on the argument stuff mentioned above.
rh
