W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > August 2000

RE: My point is a point is a point

From: Rowland Shaw <Rowland.Shaw@seagatesoftware.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 04:09:59 -0700
Message-ID: <81E198609B9DD311BE0A00508B5E2984440E5F@ipsent02.camelot.seagatesoftware.com>
To: "'Sho Kuwamoto'" <sho@macromedia.com>, www-style@w3.org
No, a pixel is defined as viewing angle where no device unit is suitable --
a point is *ALWAYS* 1/72 of an inch.

-----Original Message-----
From: Sho Kuwamoto [mailto:sho@macromedia.com]
Sent: 31 July 2000 18:25
To: www-style@w3.org
Subject: Re: My point is a point is a point


Which is why (for better or for worse) a point is defined in terms of visual
angle in CSS. Since football stadium signs are usually read from a large
distance, a "point" according to this definition would be rather large.

Of course, this definition still doesn't make it any easier to predict
what's going to happen on any given display device.

-Sho
 

on 7/31/00 10:13 AM, py8ieh=wasp@bath.ac.uk at py8ieh=wasp@bath.ac.uk wrote:

> On Mon, 31 Jul 2000, Walter Ian Kaye wrote:
>> 
>> A point is a PHYSICAL measurement; it is only /mapped/ to pixels,
>> not defined by them.
> 
> And just to reinforce this -- if each pixel is half an inch high (think
> football stadium signs) then 72pt text is a grand total of two pixels
> high. Which is not very readable! ;-)
> 
> Hence always use relative units!
Received on Tuesday, 1 August 2000 07:10:39 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:05 GMT