From: Bert Bos <bert@let.rug.nl>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 1995 15:43:07 +0200 (METDST)
Message-Id: <199507311343.AA013358187@freya.let.rug.nl>
To: pbg@arbortext.com (Paul Grosso)

Paul Grosso writes
|> From: Hakon Lie <Hakon.Lie@sophia.inria.fr>
|>
|> Typographers!
|>
|> If your font size is 12pt and the distance between base lines is 14
|> pt, is leading then 2pt or 14pt? The literature has diverging opinions
|> on this, which -- if any -- is correct?
|
|Though both have at times been used, by far the more common in use
|recently--especially in the computerized typesetting world--is the
|latter, i.e., baseline-to-baseline measure, e.g., 14pt in your example.

Can you find proof of that? I haven't been able to find any. On the
other hand, I've seen four books, all written in the DTP era, that
define leading as 2pt and only one that says 14pt.

|TeX, the Output Specification (aka FOSIs), and DSSSL are among those

That's not correct. TeX doesn't use the term leading anywhere (except
in the index, where the reader is referred to \baselineskip and
\vskip). In fact, TeX has both \baselineskip (baseline-to-baseline
distance) and \lineskip (extra space between lines) and a mechanism
for choosing which of the two is used (\lineskiplimit).

DSSSL doesn't have leading either, it specifies line spacing in a
completely different way: pre-line-spacing (the minimum height of a
line) and post-line-spacing (the minimum depth of a line)

Another issue is that specifying the line feed might be more common
way to express the layout, quite independent of how it is called.

Bert
--
Bert Bos                      Alfa-informatica
<bert@let.rug.nl>           Rijksuniversiteit Groningen
<http://www.let.rug.nl/~bert/>     Postbus 716, NL-9700 AS GRONINGEN
Received on Monday, 31 July 1995 09:43:20 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:26:37 UTC