Re: font sizes...
Of course, relative numbers were broken from the beginning. These things
*should* have been called "font index" or something like that, since
"font size" (in real life) has always referred to absolute sizes,
generally expressed in points.
At 3:49p +0200 07/23/96, Bert Bos wrote:
>The CSS1 spec gives four ways to set the font size:
>1. Corresponding to Netscape's numbering scheme is the set of 7
>keywords: xx-small, x-small, small, medium, large, x-large and
Strange... I never thought of a 12pt font as "small", especially in the
context of Netscape's "normal" font size. One would think that "normal"
would correspond to "medium" rather than "small". ::shrug::
> > As for MSIE's implementation, could you live with
> > font-size: +1pt for relative to point size and
>Problem with this is that it +1pt indistinguishable from 1pt, unless
>the +-sign is given a special role.
Actually, the real problem with that would be it means "10pt +1pt ==> 11pt"
rather than ==>15pt. Maybe "+1ix", where "ix" stands for index?
>To help with this confusion, we are in the process of adding two
>keywords: bigger (equiv. to 1) and smaller (equiv. to -1). Points 1
^^ +1 you mean? :)
>and 2 above could than all be done with keywords.
Sounds logical to me. :)
Walter Ian Kaye <firstname.lastname@example.org> Programmer - Excel, AppleScript,
Mountain View, CA ProTERM, FoxPro, HTML
http://www.natural-innovations.com/ Musician - Guitarist, Songwriter