W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > July 1997

Re: font sizes in ems

From: David Perrell <davidp@earthlink.net>
Date: Mon, 21 Jul 1997 14:45:49 -0700
Message-Id: <199707212155.OAA14152@sweden.it.earthlink.net>
To: "Chris Lilley" <Chris.Lilley@sophia.inria.fr>, "www-style" <www-style@w3.org>, "Todd Fahrner" <fahrner@pobox.com>
Chris Lilley wrote:
> In NSN4.01p6 for SGI, changing the default size in preferences
(anywhere
> between 8 and 32 pt) had no observable effect. Book Antiqua was not
> present, Palatino was (in BDF format at 100dpi and with these sizes

In the Win32 version (95 and NT) changing the default font size, either
in preferences or using 'Ctrl-]' and 'Ctrl-[', changes the sizes in the
window correspondingly.

> but was not selected due to the bitmap version being found first.

Odd rendering of Palatino. The hyphens look like en dashes.
 
> Verdana was present (an experiment, converting the TrueType into
Type1).

But didn't display.
 
> There were some odd effects on the last two lines, depending on
resizing
> the last line of text would disappear.

Yes, depending on context, NSN really screws up inline images in the
Win32 version, also.

> Results in NSN4.01 for Mac were similar. Book Antiqua was not present
> either, Palatino and Verdana were. Here are two dumps, with and
without
> smoothtype extension

Judging from the size of the system text, the results appear reasonably
close to my W95 screen. Far closer, I expect, than it would be with
points.

The skinniness of the SGI glyphs demonstrates a problem with most
displays. The most common body text sizes fall right at the 'cusp'
between 1- and 2-pixel wide vertical strokes. So going from, say, 11 to
12pt type can make a big difference in appearance. 

Thanks for the comparison.

David Perrell
Received on Monday, 21 July 1997 17:55:44 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:53:50 GMT