W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-css-testsuite@w3.org > October 2018

Re: [css-values] possible circular dependency of lh unit

From: Florian Rivoal <florian@rivoal.net>
Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2018 22:23:56 +0100
Cc: Amelia Bellamy-Royds <amelia.bellamy.royds@gmail.com>, "public-css-testsuite@w3.org" <public-css-testsuite@w3.org>
Message-Id: <10597F56-ACFB-45E9-9F61-C0540A248773@rivoal.net>
To: Gérard Talbot <www-style@gtalbot.org>, fantasai <fantasai@inkedblade.net>

> On Oct 25, 2018, at 22:16, Gérard Talbot <www-style@gtalbot.org> wrote:
> Le 2018-10-24 20:12, Amelia Bellamy-Royds a écrit :
>> Hi Gérard,
>> There's a paragraph at the end of the section on font-relative units that
>> explains how circular references are avoided.
>> https://drafts.csswg.org/css-values-4/#font-relative-lengths
> Hello Amelia,
> Thank you for your response. I missed that.
> [snipped]
>>> When used in the value of the font-size
>>> <https://drafts.csswg.org/css-fonts-3/#propdef-font-size> property on the
>>> element they refer to, they resolve against the computed metrics of the
>>> parent element—or against the computed metrics corresponding to the
>>> initial values of the font and line-height properties, if the element has
>>> no parent.
> [snipped]
> I am also confused about the meaning of that parg with regards to one particular code scenario.
> Let's postulate that the computed metrics corresponding to the initial value of the line-height is 19.2px and that the initial font size value for the root element is 16px (these values are usually in effect in the CSS tests). Then what is the used font size for the root element in this rule:
> html {font-size: 2lh;} /* I think it should be 38.4px */

With the above assumptions, yes.

> Why that particular parg says "initial values of the font" and not "initial values of the font size"? And why not initial value of font size *or* line-height?

I am unsure about the difference you make between "and" and "or" in this sentence.

As for "font" vs "font-size", I think I agree with you, but I am no longer sure why the text is this way. However, fantasai made large editorial fixes to that text a while back[1], but did not change that, so I am wondering if this was justified after all. Fantasai?


[1] https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/commit/b3b3292e413958ad81e3567059247e5ea87d76a0
Received on Wednesday, 31 October 2018 21:24:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 20 January 2023 19:58:23 UTC