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

Re: What's an em

From: Todd Fahrner <fahrner@pobox.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2000 17:09:02 -0800
Message-Id: <v04220818b4bd31d67f05@[]>
To: Just van Rossum <just@letterror.com>, erik@netscape.com (Erik van der Poel)
Cc: www-style@w3.org, "'www-font@w3.org'" <www-font@w3.org>
At 12:56 AM +0100 2/2/00, Just van Rossum wrote:
>At 3:24 PM -0800 01-02-2000, Erik van der Poel wrote:
>  >If so, the "Pointsize" isn't the only thing that means anything. CSS2
>  >claims that the ex/em ratio is important.
>I'm not saying it's important, I'm saying you can't reliably *get* at that
>ratio, and that renders the whole discussion rather meaningless.

If the requirement were for the level of precision and optical 
refinement appropriate to hand-set materials (or even better DTP), I 
would agree. But as I see it, font-size-adjust is merely a safety net 
- a very loosely woven one - to help mitigate some of the worst 
effects of font substitution, especially on screen. I think the 
exhibits in CSS-2 speak for themselves.

Todd Fahrner
Received on Tuesday, 1 February 2000 20:09:36 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:26:53 UTC