selling lyx part 2

[Martin A. Hansen]

hello again


thank you very much for the input.

apparently noone have any slideshow presentations introducing lyx to the 
ignorant word user.

i hereby suggest we make one - and perhaps even include it in the documentation 
on lyx.org?

but first i will summon up the pro/con input from the mailing list:


pros:
=

* easy to use and stable

* free

* well written and intelligent docs

* focus on content instead of layout

* the printed output is truely typeset giving nicer output

* table of contents, lists, etc are automatic (with no errors like word)

* superb bibliographies using bibtex

* cross references are awesome

* cross references (and citition dito) are automatically numbered and maintained

* departmental/group standard documents gets lean

* math equations are handled professionally

* journals may provide latex classes of thier own

* it is possible to make pdf files with pdflatex

* uses a text file format allowing for easy and full back compatibility

* encourages structured thinking with putting in the section and subsection 
when one starts writing

* tables and graphics within tables is possible

* minitoc is a nice feature

* great at placement of figures etc. no orphans.

* figure placement are superior and true to typesetting


cons:
=

* lyx/word exchange is horrible

* the word position in the printed doc is not the same as on the screen

* a longer learning curve once you need to move beyond the basics

* you will hit very quickly the ceiling of lyx and have your documents full of 
ERT

* latex is hard to debug. error messages are usually quite meaningless 

* lyx on windows is still a bit of a challenge

* not very many people uses lyx. you need to bring your own laptop with lyx 
always.




did i miss anything important in the above?

is it not a strong argument that the entire body of litterature within the 
sciences is typeset with latex? (is this true?)




now for the layout of the slideshow (first the thinking/brainstorming part - 
your help is ugently needed!).

i will suggest something around 20 slides and if possible examplify all of the 
above pros. and of couse, one
should also mention the cons ...


1 cover slide

1 slide with introduction

1 slide with tex/latex/lyx history and use

some slides giving a graphical tour just like on lyx.org

a couple of slides showing how to insert citation references (this really seem 
to win peoples hearts)

a couple of slides on how to install lyx

1 final slide with pros and cons



suggestions to the composition of this slideshow is welcome - and if anyone 
have ideas to any particular slide, dont hesitate.




best regards



martin

RE: selling lyx part 2

[Jack M. Lyon]

In my last post, I forgot to mention that I've been using LyX as described
in my newsletter here:

http://lists.topica.com/lists/editorium/read/message.html?mid=1718444865

For those who need to go from Word to LaTeX or LyX, the article provides
some helpful tips, along with a process that beginning LyX users might find
useful.

Best wishes,
Jack M. Lyon
___

The EDITORIUM
Microsoft Word Add-Ins for Publishing Professionals
http://www.editorium.com
___

RE: selling lyx part 2

[Jack M. Lyon]

> cons:
> =
> 
> * lyx/word exchange is horrible

That depends. There are lots of ways to get a LaTeX file out of a Word
document (got to use Word paragraph styles, though):

http://www.tug.org/utilities/texconv/pc2txtbl.html

Then use TeX2LyX or reLyX to bring the file into LyX.

Also worth investigating would be saving a Word document as filtered HTML or
as XML and then using an HTML2LaTeX or XML2LaTeX converter, which you can
find on Google.

And if you *export* a LyX document as HTML, you can then open the HTML
document into Word.

It's certainly not a perfect round-trip, but it's not bad, either.
Disclaimer: I'm not taking math into account. :)

Best wishes,
Jack M. Lyon
___

The EDITORIUM
Microsoft Word Add-Ins for Publishing Professionals
http://www.editorium.com
___
 

> -Original Message-
> From: Martin A. Hansen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 2:09 PM
> To: lyx-users@lists.lyx.org
> Subject: selling lyx part 2
> 
> 
> hello again
> 
> 
> thank you very much for the input.
> 
> apparently noone have any slideshow presentations introducing 
> lyx to the ignorant word user.
> 
> i hereby suggest we make one - and perhaps even include it in 
> the documentation on lyx.org?
> 
> but first i will summon up the pro/con input from the mailing list:
> 
> 
> pros:
> =
> 
> * easy to use and stable
> 
> * free
> 
> * well written and intelligent docs
> 
> * focus on content instead of layout
> 
> * the printed output is truely typeset giving nicer output
> 
> * table of contents, lists, etc are automatic (with no errors 
> like word)
> 
> * superb bibliographies using bibtex
> 
> * cross references are awesome
> 
> * cross references (and citition dito) are automatically 
> numbered and maintained
> 
> * departmental/group standard documents gets lean
> 
> * math equations are handled professionally
> 
> * journals may provide latex classes of thier own
> 
> * it is possible to make pdf files with pdflatex
> 
> * uses a text file format allowing for easy and full back 
> compatibility
> 
> * encourages structured thinking with putting in the section 
> and subsection when one starts writing
> 
> * tables and graphics within tables is possible
> 
> * minitoc is a nice feature
> 
> * great at placement of figures etc. no orphans.
> 
> * figure placement are superior and true to typesetting
> 
> 
> cons:
> =
> 
> * lyx/word exchange is horrible
> 
> * the word position in the printed doc is not the same as on 
> the screen
> 
> * a longer learning curve once you need to move beyond the basics
> 
> * you will hit very quickly the ceiling of lyx and have your 
> documents full of ERT
> 
> * latex is hard to debug. error messages are usually quite 
> meaningless 
> 
> * lyx on windows is still a bit of a challenge
> 
> * not very many people uses lyx. you need to bring your own 
> laptop with lyx always.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> did i miss anything important in the above?
> 
> is it not a strong argument that the entire body of 
> litterature within the sciences is typeset with latex? (is this true?)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> now for the layout of the slideshow (first the 
> thinking/brainstorming part - your help is ugently needed!).
> 
> i will suggest something around 20 slides and if possible 
> examplify all of the above pros. and of couse, one
> should also mention the cons ...
> 
> 
> 1 cover slide
> 
> 1 slide with introduction
> 
> 1 slide with tex/latex/lyx history and use
> 
> some slides giving a graphical tour just like on lyx.org
> 
> a couple of slides showing how to insert citation references 
> (this really seem to win peoples hearts)
> 
> a couple of slides on how to install lyx
> 
> 1 final slide with pros and cons
> 
> 
> 
> suggestions to the composition of this slideshow is welcome - 
> and if anyone have ideas to any particular slide, dont hesitate.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> best regards
> 
> 
> 
> martin
> 

Re: selling lyx part 2

[Martin A. Hansen]

i am currently writing a paper (in lyx of couse) and my coauthor wanted
the manuscript for editing. now, he uses word and only word. therefore i
am forced to use some two-step method in order to generate a .rtf
document he can open. at this point the 50 or so citation references
have gone fubar. after my coauthor has finished editing the manuscript
he will return it in .doc or .rtf format and i am going to either locate
the changes he made and copy/paste those to my version of the manuscript
- or reformat the entire manuscript again with lyx (includin the 50 citation 
refs).

if that is not horrible, i dont want to know what horrible is!



martin




On Tue, Mar 01, 2005 at 02:26:59PM -0700, Jack M. Lyon wrote:
> > cons:
> > =
> > 
> > * lyx/word exchange is horrible
> 
> That depends. There are lots of ways to get a LaTeX file out of a Word
> document (got to use Word paragraph styles, though):
> 
> http://www.tug.org/utilities/texconv/pc2txtbl.html
> 
> Then use TeX2LyX or reLyX to bring the file into LyX.
> 
> Also worth investigating would be saving a Word document as filtered HTML or
> as XML and then using an HTML2LaTeX or XML2LaTeX converter, which you can
> find on Google.
> 
> And if you export a LyX document as HTML, you can open the HTML document
> into Word.
> 
> It's certainly not a perfect round-trip, but it's not bad, either. And I'm
> not taking math into account. :)
> 
> Best wishes,
> Jack M. Lyon
> ___
> 
> The EDITORIUM
> Microsoft Word Add-Ins for Publishing Professionals
> http://www.editorium.com
> ___
>  
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Martin A. Hansen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> > Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 2:09 PM
> > To: lyx-users@lists.lyx.org
> > Subject: selling lyx part 2
> > 
> > 
> > hello again
> > 
> > 
> > thank you very much for the input.
> > 
> > apparently noone have any slideshow presentations introducing 
> > lyx to the ignorant word user.
> > 
> > i hereby suggest we make one - and perhaps even include it in 
> > the documentation on lyx.org?
> > 
> > but first i will summon up the pro/con input from the mailing list:
> > 
> > 
> > pros:
> > =
> > 
> > * easy to use and stable
> > 
> > * free
> > 
> > * well written and intelligent docs
> > 
> > * focus on content instead of layout
> > 
> > * the printed output is truely typeset giving nicer output
> > 
> > * table of contents, lists, etc are automatic (with no errors 
> > like word)
> > 
> > * superb bibliographies using bibtex
> > 
> > * cross references are awesome
> > 
> > * cross references (and citition dito) are automatically 
> > numbered and maintained
> > 
> > * departmental/group standard documents gets lean
> > 
> > * math equations are handled professionally
> > 
> > * journals may provide latex classes of thier own
> > 
> > * it is possible to make pdf files with pdflatex
> > 
> > * uses a text file format allowing for easy and full back 
> > compatibility
> > 
> > * encourages structured thinking with putting in the section 
> > and subsection when one starts writing
> > 
> > * tables and graphics within tables is possible
> > 
> > * minitoc is a nice feature
> > 
> > * great at placement of figures etc. no orphans.
> > 
> > * figure placement are superior and true to typesetting
> > 
> > 
> > cons:
> > =
> > 
> > * lyx/word exchange is horrible
> > 
> > * the word position in the printed doc is not the same as on 
> > the screen
> > 
> > * a longer learning curve once you need to move beyond the basics
> > 
> > * you will hit very quickly the ceiling of lyx and have your 
> > documents full of ERT
> > 
> > * latex is hard to debug. error messages are usually quite 
> > meaningless 
> > 
> > * lyx on windows is still a bit of a challenge
> > 
> > * not very many people uses lyx. you need to bring your own 
> > laptop with lyx always.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > did i miss anything important in the above?
> > 
> > is it not a strong argument that the entire body of 
> > litterature within the sciences is typeset with latex? (is this true?)
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > now for the layout of the slideshow (first the 
> > thinking/brainstorming part - 

Re: selling lyx part 2

[Martin A. Hansen]

its my boss :o(



martin




On Tue, Mar 01, 2005 at 02:01:43PM -0800, Rich Shepard wrote:
> On Tue, 1 Mar 2005, Martin A. Hansen wrote:
> 
> >i am currently writing a paper (in lyx of couse) and my coauthor wanted
> >the manuscript for editing. now, he uses word and only word. therefore i
> >am forced to use some two-step method in order to generate a .rtf document
> >he can open. at this point the 50 or so citation references have gone
> >fubar. after my coauthor has finished editing the manuscript he will
> >return it in .doc or .rtf format and i am going to either locate the
> >changes he made and copy/paste those to my version of the manuscript
> >- or reformat the entire manuscript again with lyx (includin the 50 
> >citation refs).
> >
> >if that is not horrible, i dont want to know what horrible is!
> 
> martin,
> 
>   Next time be more discriminating in selecting co-authors. :)
> 
> Rich
> 
> -- 
> Dr. Richard B. Shepard, President
> Applied Ecosystem Services, Inc. (TM)
>    Voice: 503-667-4517   Fax: 503-667-8863

Re: selling lyx part 2

[John O'Gorman]

Martin A. Hansen wrote:
hello again
thank you very much for the input.
apparently noone have any slideshow presentations introducing lyx to the 
ignorant word user.
i hereby suggest we make one - and perhaps even include it in the documentation 
on lyx.org?
but first i will summon up the pro/con input from the mailing list:
pros:
=
* easy to use and stable
Also very easy to learn. (Much less to learn than with Word).
* free
* well written and intelligent docs
* focus on content instead of layout
* the printed output is truely typeset giving nicer output
* table of contents, lists, etc are automatic (with no errors like word)
* superb bibliographies using bibtex
* cross references are awesome
* cross references (and citition dito) are automatically numbered and maintained
* departmental/group standard documents gets lean
* math equations are handled professionally
* journals may provide latex classes of thier own
* it is possible to make pdf files with pdflatex
* uses a text file format allowing for easy and full back compatibility
* encourages structured thinking with putting in the section and subsection 
when one starts writing
* tables and graphics within tables is possible
* minitoc is a nice feature
* great at placement of figures etc. no orphans.
* figure placement are superior and true to typesetting
cons:
=
* lyx/word exchange is horrible
* the word position in the printed doc is not the same as on the screen
* a longer learning curve once you need to move beyond the basics
* you will hit very quickly the ceiling of lyx and have your documents full of ERT
Only if you want to do very special things. Most 'ordinary' users will 
never need to include any ERT. They will be able to write hundreds of 
documents, thousands of words, beautifully typeset without giving a 
thought to anything but content.

* latex is hard to debug. error messages are usually quite meaningless 

* lyx on windows is still a bit of a challenge
* not very many people uses lyx. you need to bring your own laptop with lyx 
always.

did i miss anything important in the above?
is it not a strong argument that the entire body of litterature within the 
sciences is typeset with latex? (is this true?)

now for the layout of the slideshow (first the thinking/brainstorming part 
- your help is ugently needed!).
i will suggest something around 20 slides and if possible examplify all of the 
above pros. and of couse, one
should also mention the cons ...
1 cover slide
1 slide with introduction
1 slide with tex/latex/lyx history and use
some slides giving a graphical tour just like on lyx.org
a couple of slides showing how to insert citation references (this really seem 
to win peoples hearts)
a couple of slides on how to install lyx
1 final slide with pros and cons

suggestions to the composition of this slideshow is welcome - and if anyone 
have ideas to any particular slide, dont hesitate.

best regards

martin


regards
John O'Gorman

Re: selling lyx part 2

[samar j. singh]

Martin Hansen wrote:


> hello again
>
>
> thank you very much for the input.
>
> apparently noone have any slideshow presentations introducing lyx to the
ignorant word user.

Second this  idea enthusiastically.

>
> i hereby suggest we make one - and perhaps even include it in the
documentation on lyx.org?
>
> but first i will summon up the pro/con input from the mailing list:
>
>
> pros:
> =
>

I would add the use of beamer as a presentation tool and would also suggest
that we make the presentation in beamer if there is support for that.,

Would also add that as a departmental effort a couple of postgrads could
probably churn out a layout file  specifically for the departments needs
which  would give a coherent look to all papers emanating from the dept.

The same could  be done with a base beamer presentation.

> * easy to use and stable
>
> * free
>
> * well written and intelligent docs
>
> * focus on content instead of layout
>
> * the printed output is truely typeset giving nicer output
>
> * table of contents, lists, etc are automatic (with no errors like word)
>
> * superb bibliographies using bibtex
>
> * cross references are awesome
>
> * cross references (and citition dito) are automatically numbered and
maintained
>
> * departmental/group standard documents gets lean
>
> * math equations are handled professionally
>
> * journals may provide latex classes of thier own
>
> * it is possible to make pdf files with pdflatex

Its not just possible, I personally have never used anything else on lyx.
Indeed it could be a departmental standard. Hence one could sell that as a
standard output form which everyone from a windows world  will be
comfortable  with compared to dvi or ps for  example which could be briefly
mentioned in passing.

>
> * uses a text file format allowing for easy and full back compatibility
>
> * encourages structured thinking with putting in the section and
subsection when one starts writing
>
> * tables and graphics within tables is possible
>
> * minitoc is a nice feature

And so are things such as the list of figures etc.

>
> * great at placement of figures etc. no orphans.
>
> * figure placement are superior and true to typesetting

I think that in the context of a departmental tool, you can talk about the
inclusion of a track change feature in lyx through patches now  and with 1.4
included. In that context I would also tend to use a lot in the way of
"Insert > Note" as they can help interdepartmental collabarative generation
of documents.


>
>
> cons:
> =
>
> * lyx/word exchange is horrible
>
> * the word position in the printed doc is not the same as on the screen
>
> * a longer learning curve once you need to move beyond the basics

Would suggest that people  use lyx but you have departmental  latex expert
and when people have a problem they export the latex file to the expert who
handles the problem in latex and then sends them a lyx file back telling
them how  the problem can be avoided  in the future.

> * you will hit very quickly the ceiling of lyx and have your documents
full of ERT

Not sure that is entirely true especially if your departmental layout file
fits  80% of your needs.

>
> * latex is hard to debug. error messages are usually quite meaningless

Thats certainly not true of latex where messages are actually quite specific
but it is true of lyx for the non latex user.

>
> * lyx on windows is still a bit of a challenge

Again, an enthusiastic graduate student could become the resident expert on
installing it for the department and its not a problem once it has been
installed. This is  less of a problem on xp I understand as opposed to win9x


>
> * not very many people uses lyx. you need to bring your own laptop with
lyx always.

You could  always double boot your machine with linux and then you have a
sensible os with you wherever you are. Indeed recent experience with
crossover and wine is actually very good so people could just load up the
applications into linux. I found the recent version of mepis actually
provides you a windows file structure so a windows user can feel at home. I
dont think we should  push this point but it may be worth demonstrating
quickly to them how  easy this can be.
>
> did i miss anything important in the above?
>
> is it not a strong argument that the entire body of litterature within the
sciences is typeset with latex? (is this true?)

Not true IMO. Bill stilll gate-crashes a significant part of this world of
otherwise intelligent people

YOu may want ot include the point you mentioned in todays post that
collaborating on a paper with a windows user can be a pain though not as
much as you have indicated. I would tend to produce an html output and then
load that into a word document and ask the collaborator to choose track
change. Then it is easy to manuallly paste the corrections into your
original  lyx document.
>
>
>
>
> now for the layout of the slideshow (first the thinking/brainstorming
part - your help is ugentl

Re: selling lyx part 2

[Chris Menzel]

On Tue, Mar 01, 2005 at 10:09:15PM +0100, Martin A. Hansen wrote:
> cons:
> =
> 
> * lyx/word exchange is horrible

Feature.

;-)

Re: selling lyx part 2

[Jean-Pierre Chretien]

>>Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2005 22:40:27 +0100
>>To: "Jack M. Lyon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>Cc: lyx-users@lists.lyx.org
>>Subject: Re: selling lyx part 2
>>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Martin A. Hansen)
>>
>>i am currently writing a paper (in lyx of couse) and my coauthor wanted
>>the manuscript for editing. now, he uses word and only word. therefore i
>>am forced to use some two-step method in order to generate a .rtf
>>document he can open. at this point the 50 or so citation references
>>have gone fubar. after my coauthor has finished editing the manuscript
>>he will return it in .doc or .rtf format and i am going to either locate
>>the changes he made and copy/paste those to my version of the manuscript
>>- or reformat the entire manuscript again with lyx (includin the 50 citation 
>>refs).

For automated compilation of references, I use a standalone
compilation of bibtex databases, with multiformat export (dvi, ps, pdf, html
and *rtf* - w/latex2rtf). Maybe it's easier to manage the bibliographic part 
from
the bib source until the rtf is OK ? (you may use whatever dedicated bst
to get what you want, and filter externally the database e.g. for sorting).

You will loose the citations in the text in this process, but does the end-user
care about cross-referencing ?

-- 
Jean-Pierre

Re: selling lyx part 2

[G. Milde]

On  1.03.05, Martin A. Hansen wrote:
> 
> i hereby suggest we make one - and perhaps even include it in the
> documentation on lyx.org?

... or simply on the LyX wiki? Maybe even more than one.
 
> pros:
> =

> * well written and intelligent docs

IMHO, the online help is sometimes quite cumbersome and hard to
navigate/search.
 
 
> * journals may provide latex classes of their own

However, the creation of accompagnying layout files is still no easy
task and needs good knowledge of LaTeX.

> * it is possible to make pdf files with pdflatex

and/or ps2pdf (easier if you have eps figures)

 
> cons:
> =
> 
> * lyx/word exchange is horrible
> 
> * the word 

(and more important figures, table, minipage)

>   position in the printed doc is not the same as on the screen

 
> * not very many people uses lyx. you need to bring your own 
>   laptop with lyx always.

AFAIK, the Knoppix live linux CD has LyX on it. So, instead of a
laptop, a simple CD might suffice to edit your documents.

Presentations are easily done from the pdf output with Arcobat
Reader.
 
> is it not a strong argument that the entire body of literature within
> the sciences is typeset with latex? (is this true?)

Not the entire one, however a big part, especially in mathematics and
physics. For instance the LANL preprint server (manily physics) stronly
recommends publishing the tex source.
 
> now for the layout of the slideshow (first the thinking/brainstorming
> part - your help is ugently needed!).
> 
> i will suggest something around 20 slides and if possible examplify all
> of the above pros. and of couse, one should also mention the cons ...

Less is more :-) (Search the list archive for previous discussions
about good presentations (with beamer).)
 
> 1 final slide with pros and cons

I doubt, all of the above ones will fit on one slide (or make sense if
stuffed on one slide)

-- 
G.Milde web.de

Re: selling lyx part 2

[chr]

On Tue, 1 Mar 2005, Martin A. Hansen wrote:

> i hereby suggest we make one - and perhaps even include it in the
> documentation on lyx.org?
> 
> but first i will summon up the pro/con input from the mailing list:

I placed your list on the following wiki page:

http://wiki.lyx.org/LyX/ProsAndCons

/Christian

-- 
Christian Ridderström, +46-8-768 39 44   http://www.md.kth.se/~chr

Re: selling lyx part 2

[Miki Dovrat]

My suggestion:

Go personally and install lyx by yourself on your boss's/co-author's 
computer, make sure everything works by yourself.

Now spend 5 minutes with him on basic editing in lyx, and hope for the best.

Is that feasable?

"Martin A. Hansen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message 
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>i am currently writing a paper (in lyx of couse) and my coauthor wanted
> the manuscript for editing. now, he uses word and only word. therefore i
> am forced to use some two-step method in order to generate a .rtf
> document he can open. at this point the 50 or so citation references
> have gone fubar. after my coauthor has finished editing the manuscript
> he will return it in .doc or .rtf format and i am going to either locate
> the changes he made and copy/paste those to my version of the manuscript
> - or reformat the entire manuscript again with lyx (includin the 50 
> citation refs).
>
> if that is not horrible, i dont want to know what horrible is!
>
>
>
> martin
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 01, 2005 at 02:26:59PM -0700, Jack M. Lyon wrote:
>> > cons:
>> > =
>> >
>> > * lyx/word exchange is horrible
>>
>> That depends. There are lots of ways to get a LaTeX file out of a Word
>> document (got to use Word paragraph styles, though):
>>
>> http://www.tug.org/utilities/texconv/pc2txtbl.html
>>
>> Then use TeX2LyX or reLyX to bring the file into LyX.
>>
>> Also worth investigating would be saving a Word document as filtered HTML 
>> or
>> as XML and then using an HTML2LaTeX or XML2LaTeX converter, which you can
>> find on Google.
>>
>> And if you export a LyX document as HTML, you can open the HTML document
>> into Word.
>>
>> It's certainly not a perfect round-trip, but it's not bad, either. And 
>> I'm
>> not taking math into account. :)
>>
>> Best wishes,
>> Jack M. Lyon
>> ___
>>
>> The EDITORIUM
>> Microsoft Word Add-Ins for Publishing Professionals
>> http://www.editorium.com
>> ___
>>
>>
>> > -Original Message-
>> > From: Martin A. Hansen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> > Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 2:09 PM
>> > To: lyx-users@lists.lyx.org
>> > Subject: selling lyx part 2
>> >
>> >
>> > hello again
>> >
>> >
>> > thank you very much for the input.
>> >
>> > apparently noone have any slideshow presentations introducing
>> > lyx to the ignorant word user.
>> >
>> > i hereby suggest we make one - and perhaps even include it in
>> > the documentation on lyx.org?
>> >
>> > but first i will summon up the pro/con input from the mailing list:
>> >
>> >
>> > pros:
>> > =
>> >
>> > * easy to use and stable
>> >
>> > * free
>> >
>> > * well written and intelligent docs
>> >
>> > * focus on content instead of layout
>> >
>> > * the printed output is truely typeset giving nicer output
>> >
>> > * table of contents, lists, etc are automatic (with no errors
>> > like word)
>> >
>> > * superb bibliographies using bibtex
>> >
>> > * cross references are awesome
>> >
>> > * cross references (and citition dito) are automatically
>> > numbered and maintained
>> >
>> > * departmental/group standard documents gets lean
>> >
>> > * math equations are handled professionally
>> >
>> > * journals may provide latex classes of thier own
>> >
>> > * it is possible to make pdf files with pdflatex
>> >
>> > * uses a text file format allowing for easy and full back
>> > compatibility
>> >
>> > * encourages structured thinking with putting in the section
>> > and subsection when one starts writing
>> >
>> > * tables and graphics within tables is possible
>> >
>> > * minitoc is a nice feature
>> >
>> > * great at placement of figures etc. no orphans.
>> >
>> > * figure placement are superior and true to typesetting
>> >
>> >
>> > cons:
>> > =
>> >
>> > * lyx/word exchange is horrible
>> >
>> > * the word position in the printed doc is not the same as on
>> > the screen
>> >
>> > * a longer learning curve once you need to move bey

Re: selling lyx part 2

[Martin A. Hansen]

does lyx run on mac os9? word does ...



martin




On Wed, Mar 02, 2005 at 02:27:28PM +0200, Miki Dovrat wrote:
> My suggestion:
> 
> Go personally and install lyx by yourself on your boss's/co-author's 
> computer, make sure everything works by yourself.
> 
> Now spend 5 minutes with him on basic editing in lyx, and hope for the best.
> 
> Is that feasable?
> 
> "Martin A. Hansen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message 
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >i am currently writing a paper (in lyx of couse) and my coauthor wanted
> > the manuscript for editing. now, he uses word and only word. therefore i
> > am forced to use some two-step method in order to generate a .rtf
> > document he can open. at this point the 50 or so citation references
> > have gone fubar. after my coauthor has finished editing the manuscript
> > he will return it in .doc or .rtf format and i am going to either locate
> > the changes he made and copy/paste those to my version of the manuscript
> > - or reformat the entire manuscript again with lyx (includin the 50 
> > citation refs).
> >
> > if that is not horrible, i dont want to know what horrible is!
> >
> >
> >
> > martin
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 01, 2005 at 02:26:59PM -0700, Jack M. Lyon wrote:
> >> > cons:
> >> > =
> >> >
> >> > * lyx/word exchange is horrible
> >>
> >> That depends. There are lots of ways to get a LaTeX file out of a Word
> >> document (got to use Word paragraph styles, though):
> >>
> >> http://www.tug.org/utilities/texconv/pc2txtbl.html
> >>
> >> Then use TeX2LyX or reLyX to bring the file into LyX.
> >>
> >> Also worth investigating would be saving a Word document as filtered HTML 
> >> or
> >> as XML and then using an HTML2LaTeX or XML2LaTeX converter, which you can
> >> find on Google.
> >>
> >> And if you export a LyX document as HTML, you can open the HTML document
> >> into Word.
> >>
> >> It's certainly not a perfect round-trip, but it's not bad, either. And 
> >> I'm
> >> not taking math into account. :)
> >>
> >> Best wishes,
> >> Jack M. Lyon
> >> ___
> >>
> >> The EDITORIUM
> >> Microsoft Word Add-Ins for Publishing Professionals
> >> http://www.editorium.com
> >> ___
> >>
> >>
> >> > -Original Message-
> >> > From: Martin A. Hansen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> > Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 2:09 PM
> >> > To: lyx-users@lists.lyx.org
> >> > Subject: selling lyx part 2
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > hello again
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > thank you very much for the input.
> >> >
> >> > apparently noone have any slideshow presentations introducing
> >> > lyx to the ignorant word user.
> >> >
> >> > i hereby suggest we make one - and perhaps even include it in
> >> > the documentation on lyx.org?
> >> >
> >> > but first i will summon up the pro/con input from the mailing list:
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > pros:
> >> > =
> >> >
> >> > * easy to use and stable
> >> >
> >> > * free
> >> >
> >> > * well written and intelligent docs
> >> >
> >> > * focus on content instead of layout
> >> >
> >> > * the printed output is truely typeset giving nicer output
> >> >
> >> > * table of contents, lists, etc are automatic (with no errors
> >> > like word)
> >> >
> >> > * superb bibliographies using bibtex
> >> >
> >> > * cross references are awesome
> >> >
> >> > * cross references (and citition dito) are automatically
> >> > numbered and maintained
> >> >
> >> > * departmental/group standard documents gets lean
> >> >
> >> > * math equations are handled professionally
> >> >
> >> > * journals may provide latex classes of thier own
> >> >
> >> > * it is possible to make pdf files with pdflatex
> >> >
> >> > * uses a text file format allowing for easy and full back
> >> > compatibility
> >> >
> >> > *

Re: selling lyx part 2

[JORGE HERNANDO]

On Tue, 1 Mar 2005, Martin A. Hansen wrote:


Hello!

  This is a litle besides the thread but I think it could be useful

> pros:
> =
>
>
> * journals may provide latex classes of thier own
>
>

I'm a physcist and a couple of years ago I tried (and failed)
to adapt the revtex layout to the style provided by the Institute
of Physics. Pressed by time I reverted to the article style and
exported the latex in the final version, changed the styles and
corrected until it compiled.

It should be quite useful a brief tutorial (addressed to people
not very knowledgeable in latex) on how to adapt a layout file.
I apologize if it exists as I didn't check for its existence.


jorge
-- 




-
# # #
#  Dr. Jorge A. Hernando  #   e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]  #
#  Physics Dept., CNEA#   phone: 54-11-6772-7106#
#  Av. Libertador 8250#   fax:   54-11-6772-7121#
#  1429 Buenos Aires  # #
#  Argentina  # #
-

Re: selling lyx part 2

[Angus Leeming]

Martin A. Hansen wrote:

> does lyx run on mac os9? word does ...

I believe that the native Aqua port of LyX/Mac discussed here:
http://wiki.lyx.org/pmwiki.php/LyX/Mac
requires Mac OS 10.2.

However, there's also an X11 port, described here:
http://wiki.lyx.org/pmwiki.php/LyX/Mac-X11

I don't see any MacOS limitations stated there. Maybe someone else knows 
more...

-- 
Angus

Re: selling lyx part 2

[Bennett Helm]

On Mar 2, 2005, at 8:25 AM, Angus Leeming wrote:
Martin A. Hansen wrote:
does lyx run on mac os9? word does ...
I believe that the native Aqua port of LyX/Mac discussed here:
http://wiki.lyx.org/pmwiki.php/LyX/Mac
requires Mac OS 10.2.
Yes.
However, there's also an X11 port, described here:
http://wiki.lyx.org/pmwiki.php/LyX/Mac-X11
I don't see any MacOS limitations stated there. Maybe someone else 
knows
more...
OS X is required.
Bennett

Re: selling lyx part 2

[Ernesto Jardim]

JORGE HERNANDO wrote:
On Tue, 1 Mar 2005, Martin A. Hansen wrote:
Hello!
  This is a litle besides the thread but I think it could be useful

pros:
=
* journals may provide latex classes of thier own


I'm a physcist and a couple of years ago I tried (and failed)
to adapt the revtex layout to the style provided by the Institute
of Physics. Pressed by time I reverted to the article style and
exported the latex in the final version, changed the styles and
corrected until it compiled.
It should be quite useful a brief tutorial (addressed to people
not very knowledgeable in latex) on how to adapt a layout file.
I apologize if it exists as I didn't check for its existence.
jorge
Hi,
I agree with you. I have the same problem with NCR papers, they have a 
latex style but I was not able to use it in lyx. Perhaps an entry in the 
wiki and some expert comments would help.

Regards
EJ

Re: selling lyx part 2

[G. Milde]

On  2.03.05, Miki Dovrat wrote:
> My suggestion:
> 
> Go personally and install lyx by yourself on your boss's/co-author's 
> computer, make sure everything works by yourself.
> 
> Now spend 5 minutes with him on basic editing in lyx, and hope for the best.
> 
> Is that feasable?

Only with a very well-meaning boss. For a more cautious one who refuses to
let you install stuff on his/her computer, you could try with the Knoppix
live linux CD.

Guenter

-- 
G.Milde web.de

Re: selling lyx part 2

[chr]

On Wed, 2 Mar 2005, G. Milde wrote:

> > Is that feasable?
> 
> Only with a very well-meaning boss. For a more cautious one who refuses to
> let you install stuff on his/her computer, you could try with the Knoppix
> live linux CD.

Does that have LyX?  If not, does anyone know of a live CD with a working 
LyX installation?

/Christian

-- 
Christian Ridderström, +46-8-768 39 44   http://www.md.kth.se/~chr

Re: selling lyx part 2

[Miki Dovrat]

> Does that have LyX?  If not, does anyone know of a live CD with a working
> LyX installation?

I have taken the knoppix CD and remastered it (easy instructions on the 
knoppix website, long and exhausting procedure) to include TeTex, LyX, 
fonts, imagemagick, viewers, etc. I put Open-office on it so I could read 
Word documents, and I even had room to spare so I included Octave, Grace, 
and Gnuplot.  All these things are all prepackaged in the Debian 
distribution, including all fonts required (The Hebrew fonts for TeX  I had 
to get from somewhere else and install, they even might have been packaged 
in Debian as well, but anyway, Debian has a "alien" command to install 
"alien" packages), so the procedure is straightforward (no compilation), you 
just have to choose the packages from the installation program ("aptitude", 
apt-get). It is a "smart" program that takes care of pre-requisites and 
downloads all needes extra libraries for you as well.

When I did this, only lyx 1.3.4 was packaged so I used that instead of 
compiling 1.3.5, which was a week old at the time.

I also removed all games, some foreign (for me) language support (fonts and 
dictionaries of German, French, etc.) and other programs I didn't care for 
to make room.

If it is of any interest, I could upload the CD image to somewhere. You can 
always take this image as a starting point instead of the original Knoppix 
(for example if you really miss the European language dictionaries for 
OpenOffice and the spellers)

I don't have anywhere to put 700MB (the uncompressed version is 2GB).

Miki

Re: selling lyx part 2

[Wolfgang Engelmann]

Am Dienstag, 1. März 2005 23:05 schrieb Martin A. Hansen:
> its my boss :o(

get another one ;-)
Wolfgang
>
>
>
> martin
>
> On Tue, Mar 01, 2005 at 02:01:43PM -0800, Rich Shepard wrote:
> > On Tue, 1 Mar 2005, Martin A. Hansen wrote:
> > >i am currently writing a paper (in lyx of couse) and my coauthor wanted
> > >the manuscript for editing. now, he uses word and only word. therefore i
> > >am forced to use some two-step method in order to generate a .rtf
> > > document he can open. at this point the 50 or so citation references
> > > have gone fubar. after my coauthor has finished editing the manuscript
> > > he will return it in .doc or .rtf format and i am going to either
> > > locate the changes he made and copy/paste those to my version of the
> > > manuscript - or reformat the entire manuscript again with lyx (includin
> > > the 50 citation refs).
> > >
> > >if that is not horrible, i dont want to know what horrible is!
> >
> > martin,
> >
> >   Next time be more discriminating in selecting co-authors. :)
> >
> > Rich
> >
> > --
> > Dr. Richard B. Shepard, President
> > Applied Ecosystem Services, Inc. (TM)
> >    Voice: 503-667-4517   Fax: 503-667-8863

-- 
-
Wolfgang Engelmann
Schlossgartenstrasse 22
D-72070 Tübingen

Re: selling lyx part 2

[Wolfgang Engelmann]

Am Dienstag, 1. März 2005 22:09 schrieb Martin A. Hansen:

At my Lyx-presentation last night people were especially impressed by the ease 
a template can be used for a start (I used g-brief-de because of its 
shortness-; there is also a g-brief-en). Its just two klicks:
Load the template,
export is as dvi
and a nice looking letter appears

Wolfgang

> hello again
>
>
> thank you very much for the input.
>
> apparently noone have any slideshow presentations introducing lyx to the
> ignorant word user.
>
> i hereby suggest we make one - and perhaps even include it in the
> documentation on lyx.org?
>
> but first i will summon up the pro/con input from the mailing list:
>
>
> pros:
> =
>
> * easy to use and stable
>
> * free
>
> * well written and intelligent docs
>
> * focus on content instead of layout
>
> * the printed output is truely typeset giving nicer output
>
> * table of contents, lists, etc are automatic (with no errors like word)
>
> * superb bibliographies using bibtex
>
> * cross references are awesome
>
> * cross references (and citition dito) are automatically numbered and
> maintained
>
> * departmental/group standard documents gets lean
>
> * math equations are handled professionally
>
> * journals may provide latex classes of thier own
>
> * it is possible to make pdf files with pdflatex
>
> * uses a text file format allowing for easy and full back compatibility
>
> * encourages structured thinking with putting in the section and subsection
> when one starts writing
>
> * tables and graphics within tables is possible
>
> * minitoc is a nice feature
>
> * great at placement of figures etc. no orphans.
>
> * figure placement are superior and true to typesetting
>
>
> cons:
> =
>
> * lyx/word exchange is horrible
>
> * the word position in the printed doc is not the same as on the screen
>
> * a longer learning curve once you need to move beyond the basics
>
> * you will hit very quickly the ceiling of lyx and have your documents full
> of ERT
>
> * latex is hard to debug. error messages are usually quite meaningless
>
> * lyx on windows is still a bit of a challenge
>
> * not very many people uses lyx. you need to bring your own laptop with lyx
> always.
>
>
>
>
> did i miss anything important in the above?
>
> is it not a strong argument that the entire body of litterature within the
> sciences is typeset with latex? (is this true?)
>
>
>
>
> now for the layout of the slideshow (first the thinking/brainstorming part
> - your help is ugently needed!).
>
> i will suggest something around 20 slides and if possible examplify all of
> the above pros. and of couse, one should also mention the cons ...
>
>
> 1 cover slide
>
> 1 slide with introduction
>
> 1 slide with tex/latex/lyx history and use
>
> some slides giving a graphical tour just like on lyx.org
>
> a couple of slides showing how to insert citation references (this really
> seem to win peoples hearts)
>
> a couple of slides on how to install lyx
>
> 1 final slide with pros and cons
>
>
>
> suggestions to the composition of this slideshow is welcome - and if anyone
> have ideas to any particular slide, dont hesitate.
>
>
>
>
> best regards
>
>
>
> martin

-- 
-
Wolfgang Engelmann
Schlossgartenstrasse 22
D-72070 Tübingen

Re: selling lyx part 2

[Juergen Spitzmueller]

Martin A. Hansen wrote:
> pros:
> =
>
> * easy to use and stable
>
> * free
>
> * well written and intelligent docs
>
> * focus on content instead of layout
>
> * the printed output is truely typeset giving nicer output

I'd really focus this a bit more, since it is my personal "killer" argument: 
The LaTeX output is way better than word's output from a typographical point 
of view. Especially with pdflatex, you are able to produce highly 
professional output, including straightforward macrotypographical (very good 
page layout, intelligent setting of floating objects, good line breaking 
algorithm, paragraph-based instead of the line-based thing of word, mostly 
good dealing with widows/orphans) as well as microtypographical features 
(ligatures, character protuding, font expansion, possibility to use high 
quality [type1] fonts) etc. [1] Also, the quality of the pdf files is quite 
good. I got very good feedback from the printers which had to deal with my 
files. I also submit acrobat-created word-pdf files from time to time, and 
almost anytime, something is fishy with the file (which might of course be 
due to my missing skills).

[1] The con, though, is that LaTeX cannot handle what German typographers call 
"Registerhaltigkeit" (i.e. that the lines on each page [recto and verso] are 
all vertically aligned the same).

I know that this is information overkill for beginners. Just show them two 
outputs (of word and LyX). Almost anytime I have done this, people told me 
that they "feel" the LyX output looks better. Than you might try to explain 
them why.

Also, use a beamer presentation. Since I switched to beamer, I always get the 
following reaction after the talks: "please tell me how I can do this and 
that with power point".

> * table of contents, lists, etc are automatic (with no errors like word)
>
> * superb bibliographies using bibtex

* index generation

* The modular structure of LaTeX. Word is a big beast which can theoretically 
do anything, but in practice, it's just too bloated and lots of the features 
are half-baked. In LaTeX/LyX, you just load the packages you need for your 
given task, and you often have the choice between several packages with 
specific pros/cons for your specific task (which might of course be 
irritating for beginners). The selection of things is very good, there are 
packages for critical editions, for law stuff, for chemistry, for several 
languages, linguistics, presentations, fiction, letters, cookbooks, chess, 
typesetting music and so on. And those packages have been developed by people 
who really know what is needed, i.e. the scientists themselves.

* LyX restricts the possibilities to tweak the layout (which is mostly a pro, 
because basically it means that you are hindered from messing it up)

> cons:
> =
>
> * lyx/word exchange is horrible
>
> * the word position in the printed doc is not the same as on the screen
>
> * a longer learning curve once you need to move beyond the basics
>
> * you will hit very quickly the ceiling of lyx and have your documents full
> of ERT
>
> * latex is hard to debug. error messages are usually quite meaningless
>
> * lyx on windows is still a bit of a challenge
>
> * not very many people uses lyx. you need to bring your own laptop with lyx
> always.

* especially in human sciences, LaTeX and LyX is almost unknown, so you 
finally have to stick with word. I am not aware of a single journal in my 
subject that accepts latex files, not to speak about the proceedings.

* Some tools missing (e.g. grammar checking, thesaurus in other languages than 
English)

Jürgen

Re: selling lyx part 2

[Martin A. Hansen]

> > * the printed output is truely typeset giving nicer output
> 
> I'd really focus this a bit more, since it is my personal "killer" argument: 
> The LaTeX output is way better than word's output from a typographical point 
> of view. Especially with pdflatex, you are able to produce highly 
> professional output, including straightforward macrotypographical (very good 
> page layout, intelligent setting of floating objects, good line breaking 
> algorithm, paragraph-based instead of the line-based thing of word, mostly 
> good dealing with widows/orphans) as well as microtypographical features 
> (ligatures, character protuding, font expansion, possibility to use high 
> quality [type1] fonts) etc. [1] Also, the quality of the pdf files is quite 
> good. I got very good feedback from the printers which had to deal with my 
> files. I also submit acrobat-created word-pdf files from time to time, and 
> almost anytime, something is fishy with the file (which might of course be 
> due to my missing skills).


can someone supply screenshots showing the differences of a given layout
in word and in lyx. i think it would be very nice to draw peoples
attention to small examples where the typesetting differences are
clear:

1. line-based vs paragraph-based layout

2. floats

3. orphans



best regards



martin

Re: selling lyx part 2

[Charles de Miramon]

Juergen Spitzmueller wrote:

> 
> * especially in human sciences, LaTeX and LyX is almost unknown, so you
> finally have to stick with word. I am not aware of a single journal in my
> subject that accepts latex files, not to speak about the proceedings.
> 

As a professional historian, I think it is changing slowly in Human Sciences
for the young generation because it is now easy to get a Unix workstation
(Linux or Mac) and that professional typographers are quickly disappearing.
There are very recent LaTeX packages for human sciences like Jurabib and
Ledmac. The typographical quality of French academical human sciences books
is today quite horrid (at worse, it is just flashing of MsWord printouts)
and I believe there will be a reaction at some point.

In http://wiki.lyx.org/LyX/ProsAndCons, it is stated that MsWord / LyX
conversion is horrible. I had good experiences with Writer2LaTeX (MsWord
--> OpenOffice --> LaTeX --> LyX) and Latex2rtf (LyX --> LaTeX --> rtf). So
I think horrible is too harsh. I think it should be stated 'possible but
not easy'. The weakest link today is ReLyX and LaTeX tables and it looks
like that the new tex2lyx is going to be an improvement on that matter.

Cheers,
Charles
-- 
http://www.kde-france.org

Re: selling lyx part 2

[Stefano Franchi]

On Mar 3, 2005, at 1:53 AM, Juergen Spitzmueller wrote:
* especially in human sciences, LaTeX and LyX is almost unknown, so you
finally have to stick with word. I am not aware of a single journal in 
my
subject that accepts latex files, not to speak about the proceedings.

* Some tools missing (e.g. grammar checking, thesaurus in other 
languages than
English)

Jürgen

Perspectives from a  human scientist (philosopher) who has switched to 
LyX for good  after countless years of Word and Framemaker:

For articles: You *must* become proficient at converting from LaTeX to 
Word. Every journal I am aware of accepts word only files (or rtf). On 
the other hand, the vast majority of humanities journals redo the 
typesetting in-house. Which means you do not have to worry about the 
look of your converted document, you just need to worry about logical 
structure (i.e. preserving references and cross-references, etc.). 
Final adjustments and copy-editing are made on *paper*, not on the 
file. The best solution I have found is to go Lyx--> Latex--> 
OpenOffice--> Word.
In short: it is not as bad at it could be.

For books: Big publishers (i.e. big UP presses) behave as journals: 
they want word files and will re-typeset everything. (Actually some p. 
houses will retype everything from paper...). Smaller publishing houses 
and/or imprints will want a camera-ready manuscript and assume you will 
use Word and provide instructions accordingly (i.e. "11pt for the body 
text," "skip two lines before a section heading", etc.). You must 
become good at _LaTeX_ to produce the camera-ready manuscripts they 
want. In fact, you'll probably sleep with the LaTeX companion, as I 
have been doing for the last two months...
In short: major hassle.

For collaborations: luckily we tend to be lonely guys and write our own 
stuff ;-) However if you need to co-operate with word users (as I am 
doing now), I found it less time consuming to act as "principal 
editor": you're responsible for the master copy in LyX format, get the 
(edited) word files and insert the corrections in your copy.

__
Stefano Franchi
Department of Philosophy  Ph:  (64) 9 373-7599 x83940
University Of Auckland  Fax: (64) 9 373-7408
Private Bag 92019   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Auckland
New Zealand 

RE: selling lyx part 2

[Jack M. Lyon]

Stefano Franchi wrote:

> The best solution I have found is to go Lyx--> Latex--> 
> OpenOffice--> Word.

How do you get the LaTeX document into OpenOffice?

Thanks!

Best wishes,
Jack M. Lyon
___

The EDITORIUM
Microsoft Word Add-Ins for Publishing Professionals
http://www.editorium.com
___
 

> -Original Message-
> From: Stefano Franchi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2005 10:16 AM
> To: Juergen Spitzmueller
> Cc: Stefano Franchi; lyx-users@lists.lyx.org
> Subject: Re: selling lyx part 2
> 
> 
> 
> On Mar 3, 2005, at 1:53 AM, Juergen Spitzmueller wrote:
> 
> > * especially in human sciences, LaTeX and LyX is almost 
> unknown, so you
> > finally have to stick with word. I am not aware of a single 
> journal in 
> > my
> > subject that accepts latex files, not to speak about the 
> proceedings.
> >
> > * Some tools missing (e.g. grammar checking, thesaurus in other 
> > languages than
> > English)
> >
> > Jürgen
> 
> 
> 
> Perspectives from a  human scientist (philosopher) who has 
> switched to 
> LyX for good  after countless years of Word and Framemaker:
> 
> For articles: You *must* become proficient at converting from 
> LaTeX to 
> Word. Every journal I am aware of accepts word only files (or 
> rtf). On 
> the other hand, the vast majority of humanities journals redo the 
> typesetting in-house. Which means you do not have to worry about the 
> look of your converted document, you just need to worry about logical 
> structure (i.e. preserving references and cross-references, etc.). 
> Final adjustments and copy-editing are made on *paper*, not on the 
> file. The best solution I have found is to go Lyx--> Latex--> 
> OpenOffice--> Word.
> In short: it is not as bad at it could be.
> 
> 
> For books: Big publishers (i.e. big UP presses) behave as journals: 
> they want word files and will re-typeset everything. 
> (Actually some p. 
> houses will retype everything from paper...). Smaller 
> publishing houses 
> and/or imprints will want a camera-ready manuscript and 
> assume you will 
> use Word and provide instructions accordingly (i.e. "11pt for 
> the body 
> text," "skip two lines before a section heading", etc.). You must 
> become good at _LaTeX_ to produce the camera-ready manuscripts they 
> want. In fact, you'll probably sleep with the LaTeX companion, as I 
> have been doing for the last two months...
> In short: major hassle.
> 
> For collaborations: luckily we tend to be lonely guys and 
> write our own 
> stuff ;-) However if you need to co-operate with word users (as I am 
> doing now), I found it less time consuming to act as "principal 
> editor": you're responsible for the master copy in LyX 
> format, get the 
> (edited) word files and insert the corrections in your copy.
> 
> __
> Stefano Franchi
> Department of Philosophy  Ph:  (64) 9 373-7599 x83940
> University Of AucklandFax: (64) 9 373-7408
> Private Bag 92019 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Auckland
> New Zealand   
> 

Re: selling lyx part 2

[Stefano Franchi]

On Mar 3, 2005, at 9:21 AM, Jack M. Lyon wrote:
Stefano Franchi wrote:
The best solution I have found is to go Lyx--> Latex-->
OpenOffice--> Word.
How do you get the LaTeX document into OpenOffice?
I use htlatex, which works very well with footnotes and, importantly, 
understands jurabib and natbib.

the following command
htlatex foo.tex "xhtml,ooffice" "ooffice/! -cmozhtf" "-coo"
will produce a foo.swx file which can be imported into OpenOffice. 
Saving from OpenOffice into Word format is trivial and works well (for 
me, at least).


Cheers,
Stefano

Thanks!
Best wishes,
Jack M. Lyon
___
The EDITORIUM
Microsoft Word Add-Ins for Publishing Professionals
http://www.editorium.com
___

-Original Message-
From: Stefano Franchi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2005 10:16 AM
To: Juergen Spitzmueller
Cc: Stefano Franchi; lyx-users@lists.lyx.org
Subject: Re: selling lyx part 2

On Mar 3, 2005, at 1:53 AM, Juergen Spitzmueller wrote:
* especially in human sciences, LaTeX and LyX is almost
unknown, so you
finally have to stick with word. I am not aware of a single
journal in
my
subject that accepts latex files, not to speak about the
proceedings.
* Some tools missing (e.g. grammar checking, thesaurus in other
languages than
English)
Jürgen

Perspectives from a  human scientist (philosopher) who has
switched to
LyX for good  after countless years of Word and Framemaker:
For articles: You *must* become proficient at converting from
LaTeX to
Word. Every journal I am aware of accepts word only files (or
rtf). On
the other hand, the vast majority of humanities journals redo the
typesetting in-house. Which means you do not have to worry about the
look of your converted document, you just need to worry about logical
structure (i.e. preserving references and cross-references, etc.).
Final adjustments and copy-editing are made on *paper*, not on the
file. The best solution I have found is to go Lyx--> Latex-->
OpenOffice--> Word.
In short: it is not as bad at it could be.
For books: Big publishers (i.e. big UP presses) behave as journals:
they want word files and will re-typeset everything.
(Actually some p.
houses will retype everything from paper...). Smaller
publishing houses
and/or imprints will want a camera-ready manuscript and
assume you will
use Word and provide instructions accordingly (i.e. "11pt for
the body
text," "skip two lines before a section heading", etc.). You must
become good at _LaTeX_ to produce the camera-ready manuscripts they
want. In fact, you'll probably sleep with the LaTeX companion, as I
have been doing for the last two months...
In short: major hassle.
For collaborations: luckily we tend to be lonely guys and
write our own
stuff ;-) However if you need to co-operate with word users (as I am
doing now), I found it less time consuming to act as "principal
editor": you're responsible for the master copy in LyX
format, get the
(edited) word files and insert the corrections in your copy.
__
Stefano Franchi
Department of Philosophy  Ph:  (64) 9 373-7599 x83940
University Of Auckland  Fax: (64) 9 373-7408
Private Bag 92019   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Auckland
New Zealand 

__
Stefano Franchi
Department of Philosophy  Ph:  (64) 9 373-7599 x83940
University Of Auckland  Fax: (64) 9 373-7408
Private Bag 92019   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Auckland
New Zealand 

Re: selling lyx part 2

[G. Milde]

On  2.03.05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Wed, 2 Mar 2005, G. Milde wrote:
> 
> > > Is that feasable?
> > 
> > Only with a very well-meaning boss. For a more cautious one who refuses to
> > let you install stuff on his/her computer, you could try with the Knoppix
> > live linux CD.
> 
> Does that have LyX?  If not, does anyone know of a live CD with a working 
> LyX installation?

It was on the CD until Knoppix 3.3

The changelog says: 

V3.4-2004-05-04 (experimental)
...
- Had to remove the entire latex system (101MB) because of space reasons
...

The actual release 3.7 doesnot contain LyX in the CD version.

However, there are plenty of Knoppix-Variants containing lyx (google for
knoppix+lyx), e.g.

Quantian Scientific Linux
   http://dirk.eddelbuettel.com/quantian.html

GI-Knoppix (German Gymnasium Version)
   http://gymnasium.isernhagen.de/giknoppix/

A script to create your own version of Knoppix
   http://christophe.delord.free.fr/en/kx/ 

BTW: there is a nice tutorial (in German) for writing a thesis with LyX
from Knoppix (assuming a hisroric Knoppix release with LyX) on
   http://www.students.uni-marburg.de/~Fachs04/sw_os_lyx.html


IMHO, the lyx homepage should provide a link to Quantian.

Günter

-- 
G.Milde web.de

Re: selling lyx part 2

[G. Milde]

On  3.03.05, Martin A. Hansen wrote:
 
> can someone supply screenshots showing the differences of a given layout
> in word and in lyx. 

Good idea, although I would opt for pdf output (as we are speaking
about the printout) instead of screenshots.

> i think it would be very nice to draw peoples attention to small
> examples where the typesetting differences are clear:
> 
> 1. line-based vs paragraph-based layout
> 
> 2. floats
> 
> 3. orphans

I would really like a set of "with LyX" vs. "with other" examples on
http://wiki.lyx.org/LyX/ProsAndCons

However, I do not have word ;-(

Günter

-- 
G.Milde web.de

Re: selling lyx part 2

[G. Milde]

On  2.03.05, JORGE HERNANDO wrote:
> On Tue, 1 Mar 2005, Martin A. Hansen wrote:
 
> It should be quite useful a brief tutorial (addressed to people
> not very knowledgeable in latex) on how to adapt a layout file.

First of all, there is the Chapter on Layouts in the "Customization" Guide
Help>Customization:

  Chapter 5: Installing New Document Classes, Layouts, and Templates 

The wiki page is unfortunately still rudimentary (but has links and examples)
  http://wiki.lyx.org/Layouts/Layouts

A nice tutorial is
  http://www.troubleshooters.com/lpm/200210/200210.htm#_MakingYourOwnLayout


BTW: How about a Format>Document setting "Uses class", that would allow to
 use a given latex class with a standard layout (without the need to
 write a *.layout file)? 

 This would need ERT for new commands, but be a quick solution
 for classes that just provide the layout settings for a
 specific journal, say.
 

Günter

-- 
G.Milde web.de

Re: selling lyx part 2

[William F. Adams]

On Mar 4, 2005, at 4:06 AM, G. Milde wrote:
I would really like a set of "with LyX" vs. "with other" examples on
http://wiki.lyx.org/LyX/ProsAndCons
Maarten Sneep just posted this to the Mac OS X TeX mailing list:
http://www.nat.vu.nl/~sneep/ars/type/overview.html
William
--
William Adams, publishing specialist
voice - 717-731-6707 | Fax - 717-731-6708
www.atlis.com

Re: selling lyx part 2

[chr]

On Fri, 4 Mar 2005, G. Milde wrote:

> BTW: How about a Format>Document setting "Uses class", that would allow to
>  use a given latex class with a standard layout (without the need to
>  write a *.layout file)? 
> 
>  This would need ERT for new commands, but be a quick solution
>  for classes that just provide the layout settings for a
>  specific journal, say.

Maybe you should cross-post this to the devel list? It might get missed 
otherwise -- to me it sounds like the it could be useful, but perhaps it's 
difficult to implement, or there are much better solutions? 

/C

-- 
Christian Ridderström, +46-8-768 39 44   http://www.md.kth.se/~chr

Re: selling lyx part 2

[Juergen Spitzmueller]

Martin A. Hansen wrote:
> can someone supply screenshots showing the differences of a given layout
> in word and in lyx. i think it would be very nice to draw peoples
> attention to small examples where the typesetting differences are
> clear:
>
> 1. line-based vs paragraph-based layout
>
> 2. floats
>
> 3. orphans

I tried to create an example with LyX and Word, both showing a layout that has 
been tweaked quite a bit, using the same font (Palatino) and also mostly the 
same settings. I tried to make the Word thing as good as possible, otherwise 
the comparision would not be fair.

http://wiki.lyx.org/uploads/Examples/example-lyx.pdf
http://wiki.lyx.org/uploads/Examples/example-word.pdf

IMO, although the word document might be considered "o.k." at first sight, 
that the LyX variant looks better. Why? The page "harmony" is better (due to 
LaTeX page breaking algorithm), the interword spacing is better in general, 
page breaking is more intelligent (two orphans in the word file), pdflatex's 
"font expansion" feature is being used (i.e., the fonts are being 
expanded/decreased insignificantly in some line to get a better line 
breaking), and finally: character protuding, i.e., the lines with hyphenation 
dashes are slightly shifted toward the margin, thus giving the impression of 
a more "harmonic" margin; actually, LyX did less hyphenations, which might be 
a result of the paragraph based line breaking algorithm. Then, LyX is doing a 
better job with different spacings (we have a thin space at "e.g.", normal 
interword spacing, and a larger space after punctuations (actually, this is 
also possible with word, but it is seldomly used). And so on.

Note also that the effort to produce such a layout in Word has been 
significantly higher than in LyX. And I think the real hassle begins when the 
document has >100 pages.

Jürgen

Re: selling lyx part 2

[Martin A. Hansen]

i think the examples are very illustrative on the issues of line-based
vs paragraph-based layout and orphans. i would love to see an example of
lyx' superior way of placing inserted graphics, tables, etc.

jürgens example (great job!) should be put in the wiki straight away.
moreover, i suggest taking some screenshots of selected places in the
examples where the differences are most clear - the screenshots should
be cropped to fit nicely in a presentation.



best regards


martin




On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 04:04:48PM +0100, Juergen Spitzmueller wrote:
> Martin A. Hansen wrote:
> > can someone supply screenshots showing the differences of a given layout
> > in word and in lyx. i think it would be very nice to draw peoples
> > attention to small examples where the typesetting differences are
> > clear:
> >
> > 1. line-based vs paragraph-based layout
> >
> > 2. floats
> >
> > 3. orphans
> 
> I tried to create an example with LyX and Word, both showing a layout that 
> has 
> been tweaked quite a bit, using the same font (Palatino) and also mostly the 
> same settings. I tried to make the Word thing as good as possible, otherwise 
> the comparision would not be fair.
> 
> http://wiki.lyx.org/uploads/Examples/example-lyx.pdf
> http://wiki.lyx.org/uploads/Examples/example-word.pdf
> 
> IMO, although the word document might be considered "o.k." at first sight, 
> that the LyX variant looks better. Why? The page "harmony" is better (due to 
> LaTeX page breaking algorithm), the interword spacing is better in general, 
> page breaking is more intelligent (two orphans in the word file), pdflatex's 
> "font expansion" feature is being used (i.e., the fonts are being 
> expanded/decreased insignificantly in some line to get a better line 
> breaking), and finally: character protuding, i.e., the lines with hyphenation 
> dashes are slightly shifted toward the margin, thus giving the impression of 
> a more "harmonic" margin; actually, LyX did less hyphenations, which might be 
> a result of the paragraph based line breaking algorithm. Then, LyX is doing a 
> better job with different spacings (we have a thin space at "e.g.", normal 
> interword spacing, and a larger space after punctuations (actually, this is 
> also possible with word, but it is seldomly used). And so on.
> 
> Note also that the effort to produce such a layout in Word has been 
> significantly higher than in LyX. And I think the real hassle begins when the 
> document has >100 pages.
> 
> Jürgen

Re: selling lyx part 2

[chr]

On Fri, 4 Mar 2005, Martin A. Hansen wrote:

> i think the examples are very illustrative on the issues of line-based
> vs paragraph-based layout and orphans. i would love to see an example of
> lyx' superior way of placing inserted graphics, tables, etc.
> 
> jürgens example (great job!) should be put in the wiki straight away.
> moreover

Well, just do it then :-)

/Christian

PS. As for uploading files, have a look at 

http://wiki.lyx.org/Site/AboutUploading

same password as for editing, i.e. "LyX"

-- 
Christian Ridderström, +46-8-768 39 44   http://www.md.kth.se/~chr

Re: selling lyx part 2

[chr]

On Fri, 4 Mar 2005, Juergen Spitzmueller wrote:

> Martin A. Hansen wrote:
> > can someone supply screenshots showing the differences of a given layout
> > in word and in lyx. i think it would be very nice to draw peoples
> > attention to small examples where the typesetting differences are
> > clear:
> >
> > 1. line-based vs paragraph-based layout
> >
> > 2. floats
> >
> > 3. orphans
> 
> I tried to create an example with LyX and Word, both showing a layout that 
> has 
> been tweaked quite a bit, using the same font (Palatino) and also mostly the 
> same settings. I tried to make the Word thing as good as possible, otherwise 
> the comparision would not be fair.

I put up a wiki page with Jürgen's text here:
http://wiki.lyx.org/Examples/ComparingLyXAndWord

for future reference. Would it make sense to upload the source files for 
the documents as well (i.e. the .lyx-file and the .doc-file).

/Christian

-- 
Christian Ridderström, +46-8-768 39 44   http://www.md.kth.se/~chr

Re: selling lyx part 2

[Juergen Spitzmueller]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I put up a wiki page with Jürgen's text here:
> http://wiki.lyx.org/Examples/ComparingLyXAndWord
>
> for future reference. 

Thanks.

> Would it make sense to upload the source files for 
> the documents as well (i.e. the .lyx-file and the .doc-file).

I have uploaded the *.lyx file, but I failed to upload the *.doc file ("doc is 
not an allowed file extension").

Should I send it to you privately?

Jürgen

Re: selling lyx part 2

[chr]

On Sun, 6 Mar 2005, Juergen Spitzmueller wrote:

> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> > http://wiki.lyx.org/Examples/ComparingLyXAndWord
> 
> > Would it make sense to upload the source files for 
> > the documents as well (i.e. the .lyx-file and the .doc-file).
> 
> I have uploaded the *.lyx file, but I failed to upload the *.doc file ("doc 
> is 
> not an allowed file extension").

Ah, I see.. never thought we'd actually need to do that so I hadn't
allowed it :-)  Anyway, you should be able to upload it now.

Btw, I moved the files into a subdirectory under Examples/, so they are
now in
Examples/ComparingLyXAndWord/

/C

-- 
Christian Ridderström, +46-8-768 39 44   http://www.md.kth.se/~chr

Re: selling lyx part 2

[Juergen Spitzmueller]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Ah, I see.. never thought we'd actually need to do that so I hadn't
> allowed it :-)  Anyway, you should be able to upload it now.
>
> Btw, I moved the files into a subdirectory under Examples/, so they are
> now in
> Examples/ComparingLyXAndWord/

I managed to upload it to two wrong places, unless I suceeded to get it into 
the right directory. Can you please delete the files in
http://wiki.lyx.org/uploads/Examples/Examples/ComparingLyXAndWord/example.doc
and
http://wiki.lyx.org/uploads/Examples/example.doc

Sorry for the inconvenience,
Jürgen

Re: selling lyx part 2

[chr]

On Sun, 6 Mar 2005, Juergen Spitzmueller wrote:

> Sorry for the inconvenience,

I've deleted the files, and no worries - I know that it's tricky to get 
it right at the first try with the current system :-(  

/Christian

-- 
Christian Ridderström, +46-8-768 39 44   http://www.md.kth.se/~chr

Re: selling lyx part 2

[Helge Hafting]

Martin A. Hansen wrote:
hello again
thank you very much for the input.
apparently noone have any slideshow presentations introducing lyx to the 
ignorant word user.
i hereby suggest we make one - and perhaps even include it in the documentation 
on lyx.org?
but first i will summon up the pro/con input from the mailing list:
pros:
=
* easy to use and stable
* free
* well written and intelligent docs
* focus on content instead of layout
* the printed output is truely typeset giving nicer output
* table of contents, lists, etc are automatic (with no errors like word)
* superb bibliographies using bibtex
* cross references are awesome
* cross references (and citition dito) are automatically numbered and maintained
* departmental/group standard documents gets lean
* math equations are handled professionally
* journals may provide latex classes of thier own
* it is possible to make pdf files with pdflatex
* uses a text file format allowing for easy and full back compatibility
* encourages structured thinking with putting in the section and subsection 
when one starts writing
* tables and graphics within tables is possible
* minitoc is a nice feature
* great at placement of figures etc. no orphans.
* figure placement are superior and true to typesetting
cons:
=
* lyx/word exchange is horrible
 

Rarely a problem though.  They can still keep word (or the free 
openoffice) around
for dealing with old documents and documents mailed in from word users.
All while using lyx for writing all their new documents. Sending 
documents to others?
Send a pdf, ehich everybody understands. 

* the word position in the printed doc is not the same as on the screen
 

True - but do you really care about that?  Usually you shouldn't need to.
Still, use view->dvi or view->pdflatex for a true preview.  And this 
preview really
is true, in contrast to some word previews that only approximates what you
get on paper.  (Well, perhaps word have improved since the last time I used
it in the mid-nineties . . . )

* a longer learning curve once you need to move beyond the basics
 

Longer than what?  Can you even do the same in word?
One can easily find examples of "this thing is easy in word and require two
pages of ERT in lyx"  But you can just as easily find things that is easy
in lyx and outright impossible in word.  Cross references between
several files?  That work even when you have several master documents
that include a different selection of subdocuments?  Where you get the
page numbers and chapter/section numbers right in all cases? :-)
* you will hit very quickly the ceiling of lyx and have your documents full of ERT
 

You will hit the limit and need some ERT, but lots of it? Quickly?  It 
looks like
French users have a problem here because they need ERT for some of their
oe-ligature, and some other languages may have similiar problems. Other 
than that,
I wouldn't say ERT is something you needs lots of. Not if you're lucky 
and your
language is well supported.

* latex is hard to debug. error messages are usually quite meaningless 
 

It sure is - but who needs to?  Usually not a lyx user, except when using
lots of ERT.  And then you know that the problem is in the ERT and 
nowhere else.

* lyx on windows is still a bit of a challenge
 

This is only a installation/packaging problem, right?  All we need is a 
couple of install
programs, one who install lyx with latex and everything, and another who
install lyx only for those who have latex already.

* not very many people uses lyx. you need to bring your own laptop with lyx 
always.
 

Only if you want to _write_ on someone else's pc.  Every pc can read
PDF, if you plan on bringing a CD/diskette to a meeting.  Quick notes 
can be written
in word (or easier - in plain text) and mailed home.  Then you paste it 
into lyx and
formats it nicely.


did i miss anything important in the above?
is it not a strong argument that the entire body of litterature within the 
sciences is typeset with latex? (is this true?)
 

It is an argument for people who write science/tech stuff themselves, or 
who easily can get latex
tips from their contacts in those communities.  Otherwise it is not a 
strong argument.


now for the layout of the slideshow (first the thinking/brainstorming part - 
your help is ugently needed!).
i will suggest something around 20 slides and if possible examplify all of the 
above pros. and of couse, one
should also mention the cons ...
1 cover slide
1 slide with introduction
1 slide with tex/latex/lyx history and use
some slides giving a graphical tour just like on lyx.org
a couple of slides showing how to insert citation references (this really seem 
to win peoples hearts)
a couple of slides on how to install lyx
1 final slide with pros and cons

suggestions to the composition of this slideshow is welcome - and if anyone 
have ideas to any particular slide, dont hesitate.
 

If you want to "sell" lyx, then focus on the pros and downplay the 
cons.  Of course you 

Re: selling lyx part 2

[Helge Hafting]

Juergen Spitzmueller wrote:
I tried to create an example with LyX and Word, both showing a layout that has 
been tweaked quite a bit, using the same font (Palatino) and also mostly the 
same settings. I tried to make the Word thing as good as possible, otherwise 
the comparision would not be fair.
 

Depends on what you want to show.  Both programs can produce
nice output. (In this case the word file had much more hyphens - bad!)
However, people only want to spend so much time on fixing layout.
It is therefore interesting to have two examples where the same amount
of time is spent on tweaking both.  Something like
lyx/word - first draft no editing. Any big differences, who's best?
lyx/word - 5min cleaning up each.  Any big differences in quality?
lyx/word - how much time to make each really good.
http://wiki.lyx.org/uploads/Examples/example-lyx.pdf
http://wiki.lyx.org/uploads/Examples/example-word.pdf
IMO, although the word document might be considered "o.k." at first sight, 
that the LyX variant looks better. Why? The page "harmony" is better (due to 
LaTeX page breaking algorithm), the interword spacing is better in general, 

page breaking is more intelligent (two orphans in the word file), pdflatex's 
"font expansion" feature is being used (i.e., the fonts are being 
expanded/decreased insignificantly in some line to get a better line 
breaking), and finally: character protuding, i.e., the lines with hyphenation 
dashes are slightly shifted toward the margin, thus giving the impression of 
a more "harmonic" margin; actually, LyX did less hyphenations, which might be 
a result of the paragraph based line breaking algorithm. Then, LyX is doing a 
better job with different spacings (we have a thin space at "e.g.", normal 
interword spacing, and a larger space after punctuations (actually, this is 
also possible with word, but it is seldomly used). And so on.

Note also that the effort to produce such a layout in Word has been 
significantly higher than in LyX. And I think the real hassle begins when the 
document has >100 pages.
 

That last paragraph is very important. "It took a signigicantly higher
effort in word."  That's a key selling point for lyx.  People want nice
papers, but don't want to spend the time. With lyx they don't have to.
In practice, many people don't spend time on getting word documents
nicer than default either. So you can spot word documents instantly
by the ragged right margin, for example.  Or the occational heading
set with the wrong size.  Things lyx users don't need to watch out for,
as it is all automatic.
Helge Hafting

Registerhaltigkeit [Was Re: selling lyx part 2]

[Kevin Pfeiffer]

Juergen Spitzmueller writes:


> [1] The con, though, is that LaTeX cannot handle what German
> typographers call "Registerhaltigkeit" (i.e. that the lines on each
> page [recto and verso] are all vertically aligned the same).

Can you explain this further? Do you mean that the lines printed on the 
"left page" are at the same vertical position as those on the right?

Assuming that I understood this correctly, then why not?

-K
-- 
Kevin Pfeiffer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Tiros-Translations

Re: Registerhaltigkeit [Was Re: selling lyx part 2]

[Juergen Spitzmueller]

Kevin Pfeiffer wrote:
> Can you explain this further? Do you mean that the lines printed on the
> "left page" are at the same vertical position as those on the right?

Yes. Unfortunately, I don't know the English term.

> Assuming that I understood this correctly, then why not?

AFAIK, it's a decision by design. LaTeX uses "rubber lengths", i.e. it shrinks 
and extracts the vertical spaces (between paragraphs, after and before the 
headings an so on) to fill the page consistently. This results in a quite 
"harmonic" page layout, but makes "Registerhaltigkeit" impossible. There 
might be other reasons too, maybe even technical restrictions, but I'm not 
sure.

Jürgen

Re: Registerhaltigkeit [Was Re: selling lyx part 2]

[Kevin Pfeiffer]

Juergen Spitzmueller writes:
> AFAIK, it's a decision by design. LaTeX uses "rubber lengths", i.e. it
> shrinks and extracts the vertical spaces (between paragraphs, after and
> before the headings an so on) to fill the page consistently. This
> results in a quite "harmonic" page layout, but makes
> "Registerhaltigkeit" impossible. There might be other reasons too,
> maybe even technical restrictions, but I'm not sure.

This strikes me as a sort of "grid alignment" based on the  
leading/linespacing of the body text. Is this commonly done? 

Looking through a page of my Langenscheidt dictionary I see that lines on 
both sides are aligned, but this is maybe because the body text is 
continuous; looking at my Oxford Style Manual (happens to be sitting next 
to the dict) I see that this is not the case. But at the top and bottom 
of each page every thing aligns properly. This intuitively seems 
sufficient to me, hence my question as to frequency.

(BTW, thanks for explaining this.)


-- 
Kevin Pfeiffer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Tiros-Translations

Re: Registerhaltigkeit [Was Re: selling lyx part 2]

[Juergen Spitzmueller]

Kevin Pfeiffer wrote:
> This strikes me as a sort of "grid alignment" based on the  
> leading/linespacing of the body text. Is this commonly done?

Yes, if this is a preference.

> Looking through a page of my Langenscheidt dictionary I see that lines on
> both sides are aligned, but this is maybe because the body text is
> continuous; looking at my Oxford Style Manual (happens to be sitting next
> to the dict) I see that this is not the case. But at the top and bottom
> of each page every thing aligns properly. This intuitively seems
> sufficient to me, hence my question as to frequency.

Basically, it is a question about Scylla or Charybdis. With some tweaking 
(i.e. switching off the rubber lenghts), you can even get LaTeX to get close 
to "Registerhaltigkeit", but then you'll lose the harmonic page design and 
the intelligent widow/orphan handling, for that matter.

Jürgen

Re: Registerhaltigkeit [Was Re: selling lyx part 2]

[Kevin Pfeiffer]

Juergen Spitzmueller writes:
> With some tweaking 
> (i.e. switching off the rubber lenghts), you can even 
> get LaTeX to get close  to "Registerhaltigkeit", but then 
> you'll lose the harmonic page design and  
> the intelligent widow/orphan handling, for that matter.

Here is a nice visual example that I found:
http://www.janaszek.de/t/registerhaltigkeit.htm

It seems to me (in my naivety) that this is just a matter of granularity 
--- rounding certain values such that the vertical starting position of 
all new body text paragraphs maintains this "line grid". But you say that 
in LaTeX it's not possible (therefore also not with LyX)?

-K

-- 
Kevin Pfeiffer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Tiros-Translations

Re: Registerhaltigkeit [Was Re: selling lyx part 2]

[Juergen Spitzmueller]

Kevin Pfeiffer wrote:
> It seems to me (in my naivety) that this is just a matter of granularity
> --- rounding certain values such that the vertical starting position of
> all new body text paragraphs maintains this "line grid". But you say that
> in LaTeX it's not possible (therefore also not with LyX)?

As I said, you might get close with lots of tweaking. But IMHO the loss is 
greater than the gain.

Jürgen

Re: Registerhaltigkeit [Was Re: selling lyx part 2]

[Kevin Pfeiffer]

Juergen Spitzmueller writes:
> As I said, you might get close with lots of tweaking. But IMHO the loss
> is greater than the gain.

No, I don't mean at the user level, but as an option (programmed in, so to 
speak), so that within the limits this requires, that all other aspects 
of page control, checking for widows/orphans, etc., is still done. As you 
said, "if this is the preference," then what is lost? It seems that it 
would only lead to slightly more white space and a few more pages, and 
perhaps a slightly blockier look to pages with many paragraphs. 

-K

-- 
Kevin Pfeiffer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Tiros-Translations

Re: Registerhaltigkeit [Was Re: selling lyx part 2]

[Helge Hafting]

Kevin Pfeiffer wrote:
Juergen Spitzmueller writes:
 

As I said, you might get close with lots of tweaking. But IMHO the loss
is greater than the gain.
   

No, I don't mean at the user level, but as an option (programmed in, so to 
speak), so that within the limits this requires, that all other aspects 
of page control, checking for widows/orphans, etc., is still done. As you 
said, "if this is the preference," then what is lost? It seems that it 
would only lead to slightly more white space and a few more pages, and 
perhaps a slightly blockier look to pages with many paragraphs. 
 

After seeing the example, I wonder why someone would want
this "registerhaltigkeit" in the general case. (Sure, there might
be special cases I can't think of.)
In a book, you read one page at a time, one column at a time.
Therefore, it doesn't matter if the adjacent column/page doesn't
line up.  You never read the first line of column1, then the first
line of column2, . . .
Note that the lines will line up, if you have two pages with text
only.  Headings, figures/tables, and paragraph breaks using skips
ruins this.  You can improve on this by making sure the extra
space set aside for a heading (or skip or figure) is an exact multiple 
of the line
height.  So, you should be able to get much better
"registerhaltigheit" with a latex class written with this in mind.
You need someone good at typography (and latex) to make the
class though, simply setting some non-stretchable numbers that
match the line height  will likely be bad for a lot of other, more important
typographical reasons.

Helge Hafting

Re: Registerhaltigkeit [Was Re: selling lyx part 2]

[Kevin Pfeiffer]

Helge Hafting writes:
> After seeing the example, I wonder why someone would want
> this "registerhaltigkeit" in the general case. (Sure, there might
> be special cases I can't think of.)

I _think_ that the most common special case is/was with books produced 
using thinner papers. Paper used in books can be more or less translucent 
and lines of text on the reverse side or on the next sheet are less 
disruptive when hidden directly behind the lines of print you are 
reading.

-- 
Kevin Pfeiffer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Tiros-Translations

Re: Registerhaltigkeit [Was Re: selling lyx part 2]

[Charles de Miramon]

Kevin Pfeiffer wrote:

> 
> I _think_ that the most common special case is/was with books produced
> using thinner papers. Paper used in books can be more or less translucent
> and lines of text on the reverse side or on the next sheet are less
> disruptive when hidden directly behind the lines of print you are
> reading.
> 

It improves readibility of the right page of the book because your eye
follow the line on the left page. It removes some strain.

Grid based typography is also a long tradition in book composition. In the
Middle Ages, a copist would first draw a grid called 'réglure' on both side
of a sheet of vellum and then fold the sheet and start copying. They were
special tools for helping to draw the réglure, a metal grid applied by the
copist  to punch little holes in the sheet and then the copist would use a
ruler to draw the lines between the holes with a lead pencil. The printing
press kept this idea of grid of aligned lines of text in a sheet. 

ConTeXt seems to be able to do baselines grid layout, see the interesting
paper :
http://www.pragma-ade.com/general/manuals/details.pdf

According to ConTexT author, baseline grid layout is possible if you don't
have a too complicated layout. For example a text without a lot of
divisions, some tables. If you have a lot of divisions, titles, tables,
math, quotation, a grid based layout will lead to the possibility of very
uneven vertical spacing on your page.

Cheers,
Charles
-- 
http://www.kde-france.org

Wiki page for presentations (was Re: selling lyx part 2)

[chr]

On Tue, 1 Mar 2005, Martin A. Hansen wrote:

> apparently noone have any slideshow presentations introducing lyx to the
> ignorant word user.

Here is a suitable place on the wiki for uploading presentation about LyX:

http://wiki.lyx.org/LyX/Presentations

or if you already have the presentation online somewhere else, you can 
simply add a link to it from the page above.

/Christian

PS. The "secret" password required to edit a page on the wiki is "LyX" and 
you can enter whatever username you like.

-- 
Christian Ridderström, +46-8-768 39 44   http://www.md.kth.se/~chr

Online help difficult to navigate (Re: selling lyx part 2)

[chr]

On Wed, 2 Mar 2005, G. Milde wrote:

> > * well written and intelligent docs
> 
> IMHO, the online help is sometimes quite cumbersome and hard to
> navigate/search.

When you say online help, do you mean the wiki or something else?  If you
mean the wiki, I'd appreciate tips on how this situation can be improved.
For that matter, it's quite possible to just go in there and try to
improve the situation.

On a more practical matter, I'm planning to upgrade the "wiki engine" in 
the near future, and once that is done it would be a suitable time to 
make major changes to how the wiki is structured/navigated/searched.

The upgrade will involve some changes in the markup, but more importantly 
allow something called 'categories' to be used, see

http://pmwiki.org/wiki/PmWiki/UsingCategories

I think we will able to use that concept to improve the navigation of the 
LyX wiki.

/Christian

-- 
Christian Ridderström, +46-8-768 39 44   http://www.md.kth.se/~chr

Re: Online help difficult to navigate (Re: selling lyx part 2)

[G. Milde]

On  2.03.05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Wed, 2 Mar 2005, G. Milde wrote:
> 
> > > * well written and intelligent docs
> > 
> > IMHO, the online help is sometimes quite cumbersome and hard to
> > navigate/search.
> 
> When you say online help, do you mean the wiki or something else?  

Sorry, I was misleading. I mean the internal help (Menu Help). 
Not very helpfull captions (would you look for customization under "Profi
Tips"?) and no search-facility/index.
 
The wiki is nicely hyperlinked and searchable in contrast. (But I do not
have internec access on my home computer.)

> If you mean the wiki, I'd appreciate tips on how this situation can be
> improved. For that matter, it's quite possible to just go in there and
> try to improve the situation.

Did so already. 

Mycken tack for your work on the wiki Christian.

Günter

-- 
G.Milde web.de

Re: Online help difficult to navigate (Re: selling lyx part 2)

[chr]

On Wed, 2 Mar 2005, G. Milde wrote:

> On  2.03.05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > On Wed, 2 Mar 2005, G. Milde wrote:
> > 
> > > > * well written and intelligent docs
> > > 
> > > IMHO, the online help is sometimes quite cumbersome and hard to
> > > navigate/search.
> > 
> > When you say online help, do you mean the wiki or something else?  
> 
> Sorry, I was misleading. I mean the internal help (Menu Help). 
> Not very helpfull captions (would you look for customization under "Profi
> Tips"?) and no search-facility/index.

Hmm.. no, I wouldn't look there... guess it's better in the English 
version (I've got an entry for 'Customization' in LyX 1.3.3).

I think you should bring this up on the documentation list? 

lyx-docs@lists.lyx.org

(There's not much traffic on that list so it's not a problem to subscribe 
to it as well).

As for searching/indexing, I agree that it would be helpful but I'm not 
sure how it should be done. Thoughts?

> The wiki is nicely hyperlinked and searchable in contrast. (But I do not
> have internec access on my home computer.)

Ah.. no internet access at all, or just a slow modem?

> Did so already. 

Jolly good :-)

> Mycken tack for your work on the wiki Christian.

Tack så mycket :-)

/Christian

-- 
Christian Ridderström, +46-8-768 39 44   http://www.md.kth.se/~chr

Re: Online help difficult to navigate (Re: selling lyx part 2)

[G. Milde]

On  2.03.05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Wed, 2 Mar 2005, G. Milde wrote:

> > Sorry, I was misleading. I mean the internal help (Menu Help). 
> > Not very helpfull captions (would you look for customization under "Profi
> > Tips"?) and no search-facility/index.
 
> Hmm.. no, I wouldn't look there... guess it's better in the English 
> version (I've got an entry for 'Customization' in LyX 1.3.3).

My foult, the Customization entry is in German too (Hilfe>Anpassung) in 
1.3.3, so I was just writing this from memory of old LyXes.

However, still such basic stuff as export to LaTeX, PS or HTML is hidden
under Hilfe>Profi Tipps which IMHO is a somewhat misleading translation for
Extended. 

How about "Benutzerhandbuch Teil 2" (too long), or maybe
  Manual->  Benutzerhandbuch 1
  Extended  ->  Benutzerhandbuch 2

In the long term, I would like the Documentation to bee split into
more files, so that loading becomes faster and navigating easier.
 
> I think you should bring this up on the documentation list? 
> 
>   lyx-docs@lists.lyx.org
> 
> (There's not much traffic on that list so it's not a problem to subscribe 
> to it as well).

Done so, so see my next follow-ups there. 

> As for searching/indexing, I agree that it would be helpful but I'm not 
> sure how it should be done. Thoughts?

Help Index:

- Label all headings and provide a document with just reference buttons
  (needs a "Goto reference opens files" feature).

Search:

- grep in the source and jump to the pages? 

- Provide a html version of the docs? (Maybe just on lyx.org with a
  downloadable tar.gz-archive). 
  
  + This will be automatically indexed by search machines.
   
  + The lyx wiki can easily link to the standard documentation.
  
  + People can download them for offline-reading if wanted
(Debian could offer a lyx-doc package like done for many other
packages)
  
  + This would also be helpfull if you want to have a look at both, the
help and your document at the same time. (Well, you could also open a
second LyX...)
  

Günter

-- 
G.Milde web.de

possible strategies for dealing w/ publishers (was Re: selling lyx part 2)

[William F. Adams]

On Mar 3, 2005, at 12:16 PM, Stefano Franchi wrote:
For books: Big publishers (i.e. big UP presses) behave as journals: 
they want word files and will re-typeset everything. (Actually some p. 
houses will retype everything from paper...). Smaller publishing 
houses and/or imprints will want a camera-ready manuscript and assume 
you will use Word and provide instructions accordingly (i.e. "11pt for 
the body text," "skip two lines before a section heading", etc.). You 
must become good at _LaTeX_ to produce the camera-ready manuscripts 
they want. In fact, you'll probably sleep with the LaTeX companion, as 
I have been doing for the last two months...
In short: major hassle.
You just haven't found the right publisher yet.
At my day job, we work with a number of publishers who will accept 
LaTeX files --- .lyx files once --- (and then pass them on to us for 
writing macros and page composition).

Unfortunately, for the most part publishers perceive it as more 
cost-effective and more flexible for most jobs to convert to Word or 
plain text and re-typeset from scratch. (In particular, doing this 
allows them to grab pretty much any graphic designer off the street to 
work on it.)

Possible counter-arguments (in rough order of importance / 
effectiveness):

 - you want updated .tex source files returned to facilitate working on 
a successive edition

 - you have in place an embedded index (or will put in embedded 
indexing codes) so as to avoid the need to have a one-off index done by 
a human indexer

 - you have and want to maintain w/o extensive manual labour and 
re-checking cross-references

 - you want your math typeset just so and don't want it re-set and 
don't want to take the effort to re-check it character for character

 - you have a lot of good quality art (say drawn w/ metapost or 
pstricks) and having it re-drawn and manually placed would be a major 
point of expense

 - you want to bundle a CD-ROM or have a matching web-site w/ an HTML 
or .pdf (w/ hyperlinks)

Since you're already working in LyX, you might be well-served by 
providing your manuscript on a CD w/ a compleat LyX install w/ 
step-by-step instructions (note that it's a free alternative to Word) 
--- if your book is unique enough that the publisher can't find a near 
equivalent by some other author who is already working in Word you 
should be all set. Failing that, well there's always the conversion 
techniques mentioned previously.

William
--
William Adams, publishing specialist
voice - 717-731-6707 | Fax - 717-731-6708
www.atlis.com

Re: possible strategies for dealing w/ publishers (was Re: selling lyx part 2)

[Rich Shepard]

On Thu, 3 Mar 2005, William F. Adams wrote:
On Mar 3, 2005, at 12:16 PM, Stefano Franchi wrote:

For books: Big publishers (i.e. big UP presses) behave as journals: they 
want word files and will re-typeset everything. (Actually some p. houses 
will retype everything from paper...).
  Well, ... Spriger-Verlag is a rather large publisher and they not only
accept LaTeX files, but they have a TeXpert on staff and they provide classes
for their books as well as their journals. I sent them every file produced by
LyX, LaTeX and TeX (including all figures as .eps) and they needed to typeset
only the first four pages: half-title, copyright page and a series page.
Great to work with them; both my acquisitions editor and production editor
were helpful and supportive.
You just haven't found the right publisher yet.
  One of publishing's great mysteries -- to me, at least -- is why O'Reilly 
&
Associates insist that their authors submit manuscripts in Word format. I
know several authors who work strictly in linux and despise having to use
OO.o then translate to .doc for submittal. Considering that ORA is known as
the publisher of the best linux/UNIX books on the market, their refusal to
accept LaTeX is puzzline. And, the company is a major sponsor of OSCON, the
Open Source Convention (held here in Portland the past couple of years), but
they insist on the proprietary Word format. I sent Tim O'Reilly an e-mail
asking about this but he has not responded. Shrug.
Unfortunately, for the most part publishers perceive it as more
cost-effective and more flexible for most jobs to convert to Word or plain
text and re-typeset from scratch. (In particular, doing this allows them to
grab pretty much any graphic designer off the street to work on it.)
  Why is this, in your opinion? Are they oblivious of TeX?
Rich
--
Dr. Richard B. Shepard, President
Applied Ecosystem Services, Inc. (TM)
   Voice: 503-667-4517   Fax: 503-667-8863

Re: possible strategies for dealing w/ publishers (was Re: selling lyx part 2)

[William F. Adams]

On Mar 4, 2005, at 12:32 AM, Rich Shepard wrote:
  One of publishing's great mysteries -- to me, at least -- is why 
O'Reilly &
Associates insist that their authors submit manuscripts in Word 
format. I
know several authors who work strictly in linux and despise having to 
use
OO.o then translate to .doc for submittal. Considering that ORA is 
known as
the publisher of the best linux/UNIX books on the market, their 
refusal to
accept LaTeX is puzzline. And, the company is a major sponsor of 
OSCON, the
Open Source Convention (held here in Portland the past couple of 
years), but
they insist on the proprietary Word format. I sent Tim O'Reilly an 
e-mail
asking about this but he has not responded. Shrug.
Most of O'Reilly's books are done in Framemaker. I expect all of their 
copy editors use Word and that as a whole they use the ``track 
changes'' feature in Word.

They did do one book on TeX, Norman Walsh's _Making TeX work_ (and 
may've been put out that they didn't get some TeX books they wanted 
early on) but have since been said to've likened it to ``wombat sex'' 
for its obscurity. You can find MTW on sourceforge, but it really wants 
updating.

Unfortunately, for the most part publishers perceive it as more
cost-effective and more flexible for most jobs to convert to Word or 
plain
text and re-typeset from scratch. (In particular, doing this allows 
them to
grab pretty much any graphic designer off the street to work on it.)
  Why is this, in your opinion? Are they oblivious of TeX?
A few observations and thoughts:
TeX is viewed as a special-purpose tool for typesetting (academic) math.
Colleges don't teach it in their graphic design curricula, and many 
graphic design professors have never heard of it, and companies in the 
printing field get very few resumes which mention TeX (at my day job 
mine was the first in a six month plus search). It's hard for 
publishers to consistently find people to consistently do work in TeX, 
so it's seen as a risk.

Publishers mislike sinking largish amounts of time / money into one-off 
macro formats.

William
--
William Adams, publishing specialist
voice - 717-731-6707 | Fax - 717-731-6708
www.atlis.com

Re: possible strategies for dealing w/ publishers (was Re: selling lyx part 2)

[William F. Adams]

On Mar 4, 2005, at 12:47 AM, William F. Adams wrote:
They did do one book on TeX, Norman Walsh's _Making TeX work_ (and 
may've been put out that they didn't get some TeX books they wanted 
early on) but have since been said to've likened it to ``wombat sex'' 
for its obscurity. You can find MTW on sourceforge, but it really 
wants updating.
Oh yeah, they also did a pocket handbook on LaTeX in German.
William
--
William Adams, publishing specialist
voice - 717-731-6707 | Fax - 717-731-6708
www.atlis.com

Re: possible strategies for dealing w/ publishers (was Re: selling lyx part 2)

[Juergen Spitzmueller]

William F. Adams wrote:
> > For books: Big publishers (i.e. big UP presses) behave as journals:
> > they want word files and will re-typeset everything. (Actually some p.
> > houses will retype everything from paper...). Smaller publishing
> > houses and/or imprints will want a camera-ready manuscript and assume
> > you will use Word and provide instructions accordingly (i.e. "11pt for
> > the body text," "skip two lines before a section heading", etc.). You
> > must become good at _LaTeX_ to produce the camera-ready manuscripts
> > they want. In fact, you'll probably sleep with the LaTeX companion, as
> > I have been doing for the last two months...
> > In short: major hassle.
>
> You just haven't found the right publisher yet.

Well, the right publisher is the publisher that has a good reputation in your 
subject. All big publishers I know (for my subject, i.e. German linguistics) 
want pdf files, ready for printing (because they do not want to/cannot bear 
the costs for a typesetter). This means that I can use LyX for writing books, 
which is certainly a good thing. OTOH, the stylesheets are often very much 
oriented on word "standards", and so I am often forced to mess up the good 
LaTeX layout in favour of emulated bad typography.

Jürgen   

Re: possible strategies for dealing w/ publishers (was Re: selling lyx part 2)

[Stefano Franchi]

On Mar 4, 2005, at 6:21 AM, Juergen Spitzmueller wrote:
William F. Adams wrote:
For books: Big publishers (i.e. big UP presses) behave as journals:
they want word files and will re-typeset everything. (Actually some 
p.
houses will retype everything from paper...). Smaller publishing
houses and/or imprints will want a camera-ready manuscript and assume
you will use Word and provide instructions accordingly (i.e. "11pt 
for
the body text," "skip two lines before a section heading", etc.). You
must become good at _LaTeX_ to produce the camera-ready manuscripts
they want. In fact, you'll probably sleep with the LaTeX companion, 
as
I have been doing for the last two months...
In short: major hassle.
You just haven't found the right publisher yet.
Well, the right publisher is the publisher that has a good reputation 
in your
subject.
Couldn't agree more. And in my field (philosophy, and especially 
history of philosophy) TeX is conspicuously absent. Which is bad, 
because I really think typesetting is the publisher's job not the 
author's.   Having to submit  pdf files, i.e camera-ready pages, is 
even worse than having to convert from LyX to Word and having a 
professional typesetter using an industrial strength SW package (i.e. 
Quark Xpress, inDEsign, etc.) to produce a "good typography" book. If 
given the choice (which often I am not given) I'd rather go for the 
latter option. Let the typesetters do typesetting!

S.



Jürgen
__
Stefano Franchi
Department of Philosophy  Ph:  (64) 9 373-7599 x83940
University Of Auckland  Fax: (64) 9 373-7408
Private Bag 92019   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Auckland
New Zealand 

Re: possible strategies for dealing w/ publishers (was Re: selling lyx part 2)

[Helge Hafting]

Stefano Franchi wrote:
On Mar 4, 2005, at 6:21 AM, Juergen Spitzmueller wrote:
Well, the right publisher is the publisher that has a good reputation 
in your
subject.

Couldn't agree more. And in my field (philosophy, and especially 
history of philosophy) TeX is conspicuously absent. Which is bad, 
because I really think typesetting is the publisher's job not the 
author's.   Having to submit  pdf files, i.e camera-ready pages, is 
even worse than having to convert from LyX to Word and having a 
professional typesetter using an industrial strength SW package (i.e. 
Quark Xpress, inDEsign, etc.) to produce a "good typography" book. If 
given the choice (which often I am not given) I'd rather go for the 
latter option. Let the typesetters do typesetting!
This is possible with lyx, if the publisher provides a lyx/latex class.  
Then you simply
write, and latex typesets everything camera-ready with no involvement 
from you.  Well,
you may have to wait a few minutes for the entire book to typeset before 
you can
mail them the pdf.

There is few publishers, if any at all, who will provide you with a lyx 
class.  But it
doesn't have to be the publisher, it is something any latex/lyx person 
could do. The
publisher should really offer a discount (i.e. more pay) for a 
camera-ready book,
precisely because they don't have to typeset themeselves.  That's a 
point when
negotiating the contract.  They have more work to do with a word file.  
With a
camera ready file, all they have to do is to hand out the specs, then 
print.
The money saved may pay for a latex job, and the latex class can be reused
over and over for all books in the same format.

Helge Hafting

Re: possible strategies for dealing w/ publishers (was Re: selling lyx part 2)

[Stefano Franchi]

On Mar 8, 2005, at 4:20 AM, Helge Hafting wrote:
There is few publishers, if any at all, who will provide you with a 
lyx class.  But it
doesn't have to be the publisher, it is something any latex/lyx person 
could do. The
publisher should really offer a discount (i.e. more pay) for a 
camera-ready book,
precisely because they don't have to typeset themeselves.  That's a 
point when
negotiating the contract.  They have more work to do with a word file. 
 his may be off-topic, but your point
With a camera ready file, all they have to do is to hand out the 
specs, then print.
The money saved may pay for a latex job, and the latex class can be 
reused
over and over for all books in the same format.

This may be off-topic, but your point raised a very practical question 
in my mind:

How much would such a job cost?
Is anyone on this list doing LaTeX/LyX consulting and perhaps able to 
provide an (approximate) answer? I understand there are many variables 
involved, but is it possible to come up with a baseline figure for the 
costs involved in translating the hand-written specs for a book into a 
LaTex/LyX package?
It would be very helpful to have some sense of the costs when dealing 
with publishers.

Best,
Stefano
__
Stefano Franchi
Department of Philosophy  Ph:  (64) 9 373-7599 x83940
University Of Auckland  Fax: (64) 9 373-7408
Private Bag 92019   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Auckland
New Zealand 

Re: possible strategies for dealing w/ publishers (was Re: selling lyx part 2)

[Helge Hafting]

Stefano Franchi wrote:
On Mar 8, 2005, at 4:20 AM, Helge Hafting wrote:
There is few publishers, if any at all, who will provide you with a 
lyx class.  But it
doesn't have to be the publisher, it is something any latex/lyx 
person could do. The
publisher should really offer a discount (i.e. more pay) for a 
camera-ready book,
precisely because they don't have to typeset themeselves.  That's a 
point when
negotiating the contract.  They have more work to do with a word 
file.  his may be off-topic, but your point
With a camera ready file, all they have to do is to hand out the 
specs, then print.
The money saved may pay for a latex job, and the latex class can be 
reused
over and over for all books in the same format.

This may be off-topic, but your point raised a very practical question 
in my mind:

How much would such a job cost?
That is very hard to say - it depends on how much time they need.  A 
latex expert may need minutes to do what an "amateur" needs a few days 
for.  Creating a latex layout may not take that much time for a designer 
that works in latex.  Forcing latex into a spec made with some other 
software in mind can take time if you need to obey every rule to the 
letter.  On the other hand, you usually get away with providing 
something _better_.  (Example:  a publisher may specify some distance 
between heading and text.  Taking that literally is troublesome, as 
latex like to use stretchable space.  But the stretcable space results 
in improved typesetting, so it is usually ok.)

Now, some publishers do provide latex classes, in those cases it is only 
a question of getting lyx support. The simplest cases merely involves 
getting a few "\usepackages" into the preamble, which is a 5-minute job 
including testing. A few extra paragraph types usually isn't too bad 
either.  Some latex constructs aren't yet well supported by lyx, such as 
the not yet supported character styles.  (Markup smaller than a whole 
paragraph.)  Such things will force the user to use ERT, (or a patch to 
the lyx source.)

Is anyone on this list doing LaTeX/LyX consulting and perhaps able to 
provide an (approximate) answer? I understand there are many variables 
involved, but is it possible to come up with a baseline figure for the 
costs involved in translating the hand-written specs for a book into a 
LaTex/LyX package?
It would be very helpful to have some sense of the costs when dealing 
with publishers.
Helge Hafting

Re: possible strategies for dealing w/ publishers (was Re: selling lyx part 2)

[G. Milde]

On  9.03.05, Helge Hafting wrote:
> Stefano Franchi wrote:
> >On Mar 8, 2005, at 4:20 AM, Helge Hafting wrote:
> 
> Now, some publishers do provide latex classes, in those cases it is
> only a question of getting lyx support. The simplest cases merely
> involves getting a few "\usepackages" into the preamble, which is a
> 5-minute job including testing. 

If the publisher provides a latex package (or style) (*.sty), it is
possible to go along with a standard class (and lyx layout) and insert
one (or some) \usepackage in Format>Document>latex-preamble.

However, if the publisher provides a latex class (*.cls), you need to
create a new LyX layout. Most basically this would be a file, say,
mypublisher.layout with

#% Do not delete the line below; configure depends on this
#  \DeclareLaTeXClass{mypublisher}
# layout for the mypublisher.cls from My Publisher
Input article.layout


> A few extra paragraph types usually isn't too bad either.

If the class just provides layout settings (margins, spaces, typeface),
nothing more is required. Of course the view in LyX might differ from
the latex output, but thats WYSIWYM.

If the class provides some additional latex commands and/or
environments, additional Styles could be defined (otherwise resort to
ERT).

Günter

-- 
G.Milde web.de