Re: "em" should be horizontal, "ex" vertical

Hakon Lie (howcome@w3.org)
Mon, 11 Aug 1997 14:55:51 +0200 (MET DST)


Date: Mon, 11 Aug 1997 14:55:51 +0200 (MET DST)
Message-Id: <199708111255.OAA26052@stovner.a.sol.no>
To: Peter Flynn <pflynn@imbolc.ucc.ie>
Cc: www-html@w3.org
In-Reply-To: <199708111238.NAA21503@imbolc.ucc.ie>
From: Hakon Lie <howcome@w3.org>
Subject: Re: "em" should be horizontal, "ex" vertical

Peter Flynn writes:

 > >  > Correct, the definition of an "em" is a *square* of any given b=
ody size,
 > >  > ie 9pt*9pt, 24pt*24pt, 72pt*72pt are all ems.
 > >=20
 > > And here I thought an em was a square the width of an uppercase "M=
".
 > > Silly me.
 >=20
 > Not silly. It _was_ once the width of an M, at some time in the past=

 > when an M was assumed to be as wide as it was high.

While you're online Peter, do you know when and why (technolgy?) this
changed? Also, since the body size includes the descender (which "M"
doesn't have) this change increased the size of an em, right?

-h&kon

H   =E5   k   o   n      W   i   u   m       L   i   e
howcome@w3.org      http://www.w3.org/people/howcome
World     W      i     d     e       Web  Consortium