Re: font sizes in ems
To: <email@example.com>, "Todd Fahrner" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Re: font sizes in ems
From: "David Perrell" <email@example.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Jul 1997 18:52:01 -0700
From firstname.lastname@example.org Fri Jul 18 22: 33:32 1997
X-Authentication-Warning: www10.w3.org: Host iceland-c.it.earthlink.net [220.127.116.11] claimed to be iceland.it.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1161
Todd Fahrner wrote:
> Yet another reason why I script IE3 out of the CSS loop:
That actually looks better than it does in the W95 IE3.02. Ems are not
supported in this semi-implementation.
> Do you intend the anomalous inter-paragraph spacing?
Yes, but I since removed it. As you have noted, NSN4.01 is out-of-spec
with regards to vertical margins. Had I not given paragraphs some
margin, the paragraphs would have been closer together than the line
spacing, because I have text-height spec'd at 1.1ems. Netscape is
discarding the CSS1-prescribed 'half-leading' at the top and bottom of
paragraphs. Although there are arguments for doing so, that is not what
the spec calls for -- the 'line box' is not part of the margin and does
not collapse. To compensate for NS's failure, a .1em vertical margin is
required. I initially put a .3em margin to highlight the fact that a
margin was there. I since changed it to .1em, so it now appears as it
_should_ appear with vertical margins set to zero.
I also added a link to a screen dump from an NT running a 640 x 480
display and neither of the specified fonts installed. The page was
perfectly legible at this resolution, with much the same look as on the
It looks like the page was quite readable on your 72ppi Mac, too, and,
again, with much the same look as on W95 at 114ppi. I suspect that the
equivalent point size on your Mac is considerably different than that
on either of the Win machines.