Richard Heck wrote: >> this looks like something you can't get completely right. now what i mean >> 'right' here - right means to get the same version of the document in pdf >> or >> html - in the sense of content not appearance... >> i can't imagine how you would care about various ERTs - imagine reseting >> some >> counters etc. now this is the advantage of using latex->conveters, they >> are >> prepared for tex, math is done externaly via latex itself etc. >> >> > Yes, I think that's right. But if we're thinking of HTML as a different > output format, then of course LaTeX-based ERT isn't really relevant, any > more than it would be to DocBook.
may be the latex->html convertors know how to do it... >> i accept that some people didn't like aesthetically the output of the >> current >> latex->html tools so i didn't comment on just next convertor to html and >> in a >> way i'm not concerned whether it supports all the lyx features - like the >> list >> you sen't previously. just a small tool for people not wanting too much of >> features and a little bit better whistles and bells :) >> >> > Yes, of course, that's fine, but then it looks to me like something that > doesn't desperately need to be included in LyX. i agree and iirc Alex was satisfied with the detect-only solution. >If, on the other hand, it's an > external tool that admits to its limitations even while celebrating what it > can do, then fine. yes > There are people who use HTML for things like documentation, and in that > case I think it'd be very nice to have good HTML output. my view on the documentation woul be - use docbook for it and let other tools convert docbook for html then... see the Chris Karakas title of LyX and SGML page - "A quest for the Holy Grail of technical documentation". > And there are other use cases, too. Since I usually write research papers in > LyX, I don't see the need, myself. And if people want Word-importable things, > then I doubt HTML is really the way to go anyway. But I do see some use cases > for this, and it's often requested. So it's a matter of how much work it > involves. I think the answer is "not all that much". this is only one part - other part is that we are somehow obliged to continue with maintenance once we include it by default. as i have written before html is not worth it imho, but if somebody feels like doing it and continue with maintenance... pavel
