W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > October 2011

Re: Cap heights

From: Alan Stearns <stearns@adobe.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2011 18:47:34 -0700
To: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
CC: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CACE0646.88FC%stearns@adobe.com>
On 10/26/11 6:18 PM, "Brad Kemper" <brad.kemper@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I'm not sure if we should have a unit though, or some sort of 'fit-cap' value
> for height maybe. Most of the time, the only number to attach to the unit
> would be "1", no? Except maybe to make the curves of the smiley face extend
> beyond the baseline and cap-height line a bit, as an uppercase "O" might.

I prefer a unit. It would provide flexibility if you wanted to be slightly
larger or smaller than the font's cap height. And it would match the
existing ex and em units.

The flexibility might also accommodate non-Roman script usage if cap height
is not exactly the desired length. I know that some Hebrew fonts are created
with Roman glyphs and a Roman cap height, then the Hebrew glyph height is
set to something smaller than Roman cap height. Knowing that ratio you could
use a fraction of the Roman cap height to match the height of the Hebrew
glyphs.

Thanks,

Alan
Received on Thursday, 27 October 2011 01:48:09 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:45 GMT