Alex Fernandez wrote:
Said in this way it may look a bit harsh. The reality is that, even
though it would be great, I don't think the project of producing
native HTML output is viable. Not in a "haha you will never catch me"
way, but rather in a "it will get _very_ boring before it is useful"
fashion. My opinion is that, even to get to the point where eLyXer
stands _now_, a lot of manpower will have to be devoted. To get much
farther, to the point where it can really leap ahead eLyXer, will be
_very_ complex. You could devote a whole 3.0 dev cycle to it and still
be short of the richness of e.g. the TeX output.
We'll see, but I don't think so, and JMarc more or less agreed. The
short version of why is that I have access to so much more information
than you do, already there in the Buffer object. But really to
understand why I think this will be easy, you'd have to understand the
structure of the LyX code. And anyway, as I said, I'd like myself to
understand the nature of the output routines better, and this will be a
good way to learn.
And then, of course, there's the fact that you've already done so much
of the hard work. My intention, if it's OK with you, is pretty much to
borrow from what you've already done, at least as far as the format of
the HTML output is concerned. And, as you said, to try to produce more
or less what you do on the User Guide, etc. Then things can move forward.
By the way, in order for me to do that, it may be necessary for you to
relicense, or dual license, eLyXer. At least that would resolve any
possible problems. You'd expressed a willingness to do that before. No
rush, as my exam (which, as Pavel indicated, I'm giving, not taking) is
12 May, and I actually have another crunch of deadlines shortly after
that (conference 21 May, another the week of 8 June), so I'm not sure
how soon I'll be "lyxing" again, as my wife always puts it. But I do
feel the itch....
Richard
