W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > April to June 2003

RE: Relative Font Size

From: Jesper Tverskov <jesper.tverskov@mail.tele.dk>
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 11:02:55 +0200
To: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Message-ID: <PMEDKJMNFKKCPMNLCCFICECKCFAA.jesper.tverskov@mail.tele.dk>

Julian has the right to get some solid arguments for "em" being the better relative unit to use for font-size.

Since all user agents I know of have implemented both em and %, and the end result is the same for font-size, it is safe to use both, and it is equally good to use both.

"%" is the popular term easy to understand. Em is the professional term but is only understood by few web page authors. But the problem with % is that we then need to ask "% of what". The answer is: "% of em". So why not use em in the first place.

No big deal: If you prefer the more popular term, use it. If you prefer the more professional term: use it.

The more popular term could win out in the long run: there are millions of millions not that professional web authors. And since % is just shorthand for "% of em", it is no big deal.

I prefer to use em for relative font-size. And I never use anything but relative font-size ;-)

Received on Thursday, 19 June 2003 04:56:18 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:36:16 UTC