Juergen Spitzmueller wrote: > Georg Baum wrote: >> I doubt that anybody would see the difference in a small preview box. > > I was arguing on principle (wrt the preview boxes in ordinary word > processors). > However, it might matter if you chose the expert settings.
OK. >> > What I mean is: if we want a real preview, we would have to pass "The >> > little brown fox jumps over the lazy dog" through preview-latex and >> > display the resulting image. >> >> That should be easy as to do as well. And if latex fails we could display >> that, too, so that you have an immediate feedback what fonts are >> available and what not. > > Yes. But let's keep that for later Definitely. > (btw with my patch, there's already a > hint whether a font is installed or not, similar to the textclasses: The > combo then displays "LuxiMono (not installed)"; however, it's possible > that we find the package, but the font still doesn't work, if some files > are not properly installed, so the preview would still be an improvement). In the meantime I had a look at your patch, and I like it very much. I agree with Lars that this hardcoding stuff is not nice, but I think that should be enough for now. For the future, I'd like to avoid yet another set of configuration files. I think this problem could be solved if we made the layout files more flexible in such a way that we could add a feature to all existing document classes. This could be useful for new environments (e.g. theorems or special quotation styles) that are in principle independant from the document class (in LaTeX terms .sty vs. .cls). Such a feature could as well be a new font family. I'll have a look at the lyx2lyx stuff laater this week if Jose does not beat me to it. Please don't apply your patch without lyx2lyx support. Georg
