> > So please let me repeat my question: Can you show one word 
> > written in font Comic12 and another word in font NewYork12
> > in the same workspace in the same size?  Looking at the 
> > "Welcome to..." window, there should be a way, but AFAIK, you can't.

It's quite possible - all you need is to classify all the fonts in the same
text style. Not a good way to do it since some of the information that is
supposedly the same for a text style are different in the fonts but
possible. More generally, I'd like to see some of the information that is
currently in the text style to be in the font itself so that all you need to
fully specify the layout of some string is defined in the font. Then, you
basically don't need any text style any longer (and besides - specifying the
fonts through an index in the font array of a text style rather than an
explicit point size and the appropriate attributes is pretty dangerous if
you change the style these days).

> So, I *believe*, I sincerely *hope*, that it is now 
> established that there *is* a sufficently *rich* Rich Text Widget
> for, at least, *some* purposes. I cannot say that it answers 
> to *all* purposes, but it's also pretty clear that *building* ones, 
> using a variety of techniques, is non-burdensome to various degreeds.

Hm ... just wondering. Why is it that so many people cry for a Rich Text
Widget?! Wouldn't a HTML spec serve the same purpose?! And we do have the
formatter for it right in the system.

  - Andreas

PS. Since we're talking about text here - the three things we really need
for good text layout are a) fractional widths b) left/right side bearings
and advance widths (for overhang and underhang characters) and c) kerning
pairs (and possibly automatic detection of common ligatures). Anyone up to
it?!