W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > December 1999

Re: font-size and accents, again

From: Erik van der Poel <erik@netscape.com>
Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 15:40:23 -0800
Message-ID: <38470367.46A8F7DD@netscape.com>
To: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@fas.harvard.edu>
CC: www-style@w3.org
> > > The reason I think this is a bad idea is that it is not backwards
> > > compatible with most current behavior, and the current behavior makes
> > > any line-height above 1.0 "safe" (i.e., it cannot cause overlap).
> The only browsers I see where it's unsafe are Opera 3.6 and WinIE5 [2].

You say "the only browsers" as if the *number* of browsers matters. It's
not the number. It's their market share. Opera has a small market share,
but WinIE5 has a large market share, so Web sites currently can't say
"line-height: 1" safely. So the Web sites probably aren't saying that.
So it's safe to have CSS specify that "line-height: 1em" means the
height of the em square, not the bounding box.

> This approach doesn't make CSS any less flexible.  Everything that was
> possible before is still possible.  In fact, I would argue that it
> makes suggesting small line-heights possible while it is not possible
> the other way, since authors need not fear overlap if a font is
> substituted because the suggested font is unavailable.  CSS should be
> geared towards making it easier for the author to suggest styles that
> make sense across platforms.

What about "line-height: normal"?


> [2] http://www.fas.harvard.edu/~dbaron/css/fonts/sizes/
Received on Thursday, 2 December 1999 18:43:17 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:26:52 UTC