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

Re: Units, font sizing, and zoom suggestion for CSS 3

From: Erik van der Poel <erik@netscape.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2000 23:04:00 -0800
Message-ID: <388FEDE0.91769DE4@netscape.com>
To: www-style@w3.org
Erik van der Poel wrote:
> JOrendorff@ixl.com wrote:
> >
> > The current SVG working draft is a little more explicit about
> > 'font-size':
> >
> >     "This property refers to the size of the font from baseline to
> >     baseline when multiple lines of text are set solid in a multiline
> >     layout environment." [1]
> A teeny-weeny bit more explicit, yes. Nowhere near good enough, though.
> > For computerized, scalable fonts, I think it's reasonable to say
> > that this means the minimum recommended baseline-to-baseline distance--
> > recommended, that is, by the font itself.
> Nope. The font's recommended "leading" is separate from the font size
> (height) itself.

Upon re-reading your message, I see that you said *minimum* recommended
baseline-to-baseline distance. Didn't quite catch that the first time.

Even so, which TrueType field are you referring to? The OS/2 table
contains 3 fields called typoAscender, typoDescender and typoLineGap.
The sum of these 3 fields gives you the recommended
baseline-to-baseline. The sum of the ascender and descender does not
always give you the em height. So what is your minimum recommended
baseline-to-baseline? Ascender + descender? Or em?

Received on Thursday, 27 January 2000 02:06:33 UTC

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