On 02/27/2014 11:27 AM, Alex Vergara Gil wrote:
The downside to any python-based approach, though, is that the LyX
format is
a moving target. The script would need to be updated with every syntax
change.
I assume this problem would persist with a pandoc approach, isn't it?
The Lyx reader module would still be format-dependent, unless we go
with LaTeX.
Stefano
Dear all
I´m a LyX enthusiast and I can see how great this software is because
I have used it for 5 years by now. I´ve always asked in this list for
a static target lyx format that should be an intrinsic xml format,
which can evolve without change its structure and has some great
advantages over the current plain text format. Conversely the elyxer,
lyx2lyx and other scripts should need an upgrade.
My point is, Unless you have defined a static lyx format in which
every one can work without worry of format changes you cannot have a
robust plugin system. Developers can have more time to develop new
features than parsing every new format.
If xml is selected as static format, then a docx roundtrip will became
easier to achieve because it is a matter of converting xml structures
and the xml handling is very vast!
I think it's broadly agreed that LyX should have such a format. The
problem is finding the time to do it. It's on my radar, hopefully for
this summer.
Richard
