On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 11:54 AM, Richard Heck <rgh...@lyx.org> wrote: > On 02/25/2014 12:13 PM, Rainer M Krug wrote: >> >> stefano franchi <stefano.fran...@gmail.com> writes: >> >>> I am preparing a LyX document with all the features listed in our GSOC >>> 2014 page. I will transfer it to ODF with tex4ht, possibly fix it >>> manually, and then will circulate it on list for ODF/Docx tests. >> >> I think this is a brilliant idea - ths could then become the benchmark >> for the complete round-trip. >> >>> Here is what I am including: >>> >>> sections, headers, ... >>> lists >>> emphasis, bold, ... >>> comments >>> track changes >>> tables and figures >>> footnotes >>> bibliographic references >>> math >>> cross-references >>> tracked changes >>> >>> It will have one section per item, do we can focus the tests on one >>> feature at a time, and perhaps split the document in mini-docs an have >>> a series of unit tests of sorts. >>> >>> >>> Question: >>> >>> 1. Is the list comprehensive enough? Too comprehensive? >> >> We should possibly prioritize some aspects which are more essential then >> others. There will very likely be some different views on e.g. math and >> footnotes, but I assume that there are some we can agree on. My list >> would be, in descending order of importance: >> >> 1) sections, headers, ... >> 2) lists >> 3) emphasis, bold, ... >> 4) comments >> 5) track changes >> 6) tables and figures >> 7) bibliographic references >> 8) tables >> 9) figures >> 10) math, footnotes & cross-references > > > Tables and figures, and tables, and figures? ;-) >
Yeah, that was a cut and paste from the wiki, with my additions appended. The current list is: 1. Lists 2. Sectioning environments 3. Headers and footers 4. Emphasis, bold, and other character styles 5. Comments and notes 6. Tracked changes 7. Tables and figures 8. Footnotes 9. Bibliographic references 10. Mathematical expressions 11. Cross-references 12. LateX generated text It is not easy to write a document that keeps the various features separate, though. The main "Sectioning environments" are used through out the document. Similarly for "Headers and footers" For testing purposes it would be good to have documents with local features only. So perhaps it would be worth to have separate documents for "Headers and footers" and "Sectioning" (and perhaps also for Math, given the complexity of the issue). Converserly, all headers/footers and sectioning would be eliminated from the other document. > I guess I'd count "math" as not one thing. Dealing with the simple > constructs is essential, and perhaps more complex constructs are less so. > But it would at least be worth having, as part of the test suite, the full > panoply of arrays and equation types. I hope someone could provide such a panoply. My use of math is very limited and I have no real understanding of the range of issues involved. I read the Math manual, but it is organized with final formatting in mind (and for good reasons). I guess we should abstract from final formatting and focus on the overall features (i.e. operator, decorators, semantic relevant math fonts (BlackBoard, Fraktur, etc), and so on. Help would be appreciate don the issue. > Is it even possible to handle math macros in DOCX? I'd include them, because > we'll have to do something with them, if only put them in comments so they > can be recovered on re-import. I have no clue about this. I am not even sure I understand what is the point of a math macro, never having used them. Again, help is appreciated. > It's perhaps worth noting, somewhere, that we already know how to export > MathML, though that may need tweaking for this purpose, and there are, of > course, bugs in the current code. Richard, since LyX stores Math expressions in LaTeX native code (I believe), does this mean that our current LyX-to0-MathML code is actually (or almost) doing a LaTeX-to-MathML export? Stefano -- __________________________________________________ Stefano Franchi Associate Research Professor Department of Hispanic Studies Ph: +1 (979) 845-2125 Texas A&M University Fax: +1 (979) 845-6421 College Station, Texas, USA stef...@tamu.edu http://stefano.cleinias.org
