Re: GSoC: Overhauling LyX's converter scheme

2014-03-20 Thread Roy Xia
On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 5:50 AM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > 11/03/2014 10:10, Roy Xia: > > Hi everyone, >> >> So I've been studying the converter scheme in pursuit of the >> aforementioned project suggestion. I've been mostly focusing on the >> particular changes mentioned in the explanation o

Re: GSoC: Overhauling LyX's converter scheme

2014-03-20 Thread Jean-Marc Lasgouttes
11/03/2014 10:10, Roy Xia: Hi everyone, So I've been studying the converter scheme in pursuit of the aforementioned project suggestion. I've been mostly focusing on the particular changes mentioned in the explanation on the wiki page; that is, to consolidate output formats under one extension ty

Re: GSoC: Overhauling LyX's converter scheme

2014-03-18 Thread Georg Baum
Julien Rioux wrote: > I am not sure if we use this information. Last time I looked we selected > a shorter conversion path over a longer, fully vectorial one. This is not intended. When I introduced the vector flag I wanted a fully vectorial path. Either I failed to implement this correctly, or

Re: GSoC: Overhauling LyX's converter scheme

2014-03-17 Thread Julien Rioux
On 11/03/2014 12:30 PM, Pavel Sanda wrote: Roy Xia wrote: additional goals out there Special flag for "dangerous" targets which allow running 3rd party code, like R/knitr or gnuplot. User should allow these targets explicitly and and they shouldn't run by default as it is now. Pavel Agreed

Re: GSoC: Overhauling LyX's converter scheme

2014-03-17 Thread Julien Rioux
On 11/03/2014 1:42 PM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Le 11/03/14 10:43, Rainer M Krug a écrit : Just an observation from somebody not involved: The conversion route should be taking quality loss in consideration, i.e. a conversion path which only involves lossless conversions, even if it is longe

Re: GSoC: Overhauling LyX's converter scheme

2014-03-17 Thread Julien Rioux
On 11/03/2014 2:40 PM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Le 11/03/2014 10:10, Roy Xia a écrit : In that sense, there may need to be some judgement on which converter chain to use if, for example, the search only results in two valid paths, one with qualifier A but not B, and another with qualifier B b

Re: GSoC: Overhauling LyX's converter scheme

2014-03-15 Thread Richard Heck
On 03/11/2014 02:40 PM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Le 11/03/2014 10:10, Roy Xia a écrit : Hi everyone, Hello, I suppose my first question to you all is whether there are any alternative suggestions or additional goals out there for overhauling the converter scheme. To be frank I am not su

Re: GSoC: Overhauling LyX's converter scheme

2014-03-12 Thread Rainer M Krug
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes writes: > Le 11/03/2014 10:10, Roy Xia a écrit : >> Hi everyone, > > Hello, > >> I suppose my first question to you all is whether there are >> any alternative suggestions or additional goals out there for >> overhauling the converter scheme. > > To be frank I am not sure yet

Re: GSoC: Overhauling LyX's converter scheme

2014-03-12 Thread Rainer M Krug
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes writes: > Le 11/03/14 10:43, Rainer M Krug a écrit : >> Just an observation from somebody not involved: >> >> The conversion route should be taking quality loss in consideration, >> i.e. a conversion path which only involves lossless conversions, even if >> it is longer, shou

Re: GSoC: Overhauling LyX's converter scheme

2014-03-11 Thread Jean-Marc Lasgouttes
Le 11/03/2014 10:10, Roy Xia a écrit : Hi everyone, Hello, I suppose my first question to you all is whether there are any alternative suggestions or additional goals out there for overhauling the converter scheme. To be frank I am not sure yet. We have some bugs in the current code, like:

Re: GSoC: Overhauling LyX's converter scheme

2014-03-11 Thread Jean-Marc Lasgouttes
Le 11/03/14 10:43, Rainer M Krug a écrit : Just an observation from somebody not involved: The conversion route should be taking quality loss in consideration, i.e. a conversion path which only involves lossless conversions, even if it is longer, should be preferred. We already have a "vector"

Re: GSoC: Overhauling LyX's converter scheme

2014-03-11 Thread stefano franchi
On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 4:10 AM, Roy Xia wrote: > Hi everyone, > > So I've been studying the converter scheme in pursuit of the aforementioned > project suggestion. I've been mostly focusing on the particular changes > mentioned in the explanation on the wiki page; that is, to consolidate > output

Re: GSoC: Overhauling LyX's converter scheme

2014-03-11 Thread Pavel Sanda
Roy Xia wrote: > additional goals out there Special flag for "dangerous" targets which allow running 3rd party code, like R/knitr or gnuplot. User should allow these targets explicitly and and they shouldn't run by default as it is now. Pavel

Re: GSoC: Overhauling LyX's converter scheme

2014-03-11 Thread Rainer M Krug
Roy Xia writes: > Hi everyone, > > So I've been studying the converter scheme in pursuit of the aforementioned > project suggestion. I've been mostly focusing on the particular changes > mentioned in the explanation on the wiki page; that is, to consolidate > output formats under one extension ty

GSoC: Overhauling LyX's converter scheme

2014-03-11 Thread Roy Xia
Hi everyone, So I've been studying the converter scheme in pursuit of the aforementioned project suggestion. I've been mostly focusing on the particular changes mentioned in the explanation on the wiki page; that is, to consolidate output formats under one extension type but use qualifiers to dist