[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: the *precise* definition of 1em



Joel N. Weber II wrote:
> My point is that when your approximation of the size for one is 12
> points, and the approximation of the size for the average is 10
points,
> then when you specify 1em, the child element will now have an
approximated
> size of 10 points, and so the closest match for font one will now be
> nine points, where the parent size of one was 12 points.

Ah. I see. You are revising the first choice to produce a more
consistently sized set. That seems like the right thing to do. Child
elements are likely to look better when smaller than the parent, not
larger.
 
> Hmm... if you're trying to make something as tall as the text, it
would
> need to take the size of the largest font, I think.

That too makes sense. 
 
> I don't think X11 can scale bitmap fonts.  You can have scalable
fonts,
> but some fonts can't be scaled.

I believe scalable bitmap fonts are supported in X11R5, and SPEEDO
(Bitstream?) vector fonts. And what about FontTastic? Hey, why not
write your own font server?

David Perrell


Follow-Ups: