Re: What's an em

At 2:17 PM -0800 01-02-2000, Erik van der Poel wrote:
>That's a good point. I suppose the way around this is to measure the
>glyphs of the normal weight font, and apply the result to the other
>members of the same family (bold, light, italic, etc).

Blech.

You can't measure the *optical* size of any shape by simply looking at it's
bounding box. Trust me, you're shooting yourself in the foot. Pointsize
Pointsize Pointsize. It's the only thing that means *anything*.

>Hopefully, all
>members of a family are designed by the same designer, and hopefully
>s/he doesn't introduce randomness at this level (though it seems from
>some comments I have seen on the www-font list that artists love to
>create randomness and to confuse the poor programmers that are trying to
>standardize everything :-)

Only artists who are also programmers would do such things...

Just

Received on Tuesday, 1 February 2000 18:16:11 UTC