- From: Karlsson Kent - keka <keka@im.se>
- Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2000 18:47:28 +0100
- To: www-font@w3.org
- Cc: www-style@w3.org
> -----Original Message----- > From: Clive Bruton [mailto:clive@typonaut.demon.co.uk] ... > Karlsson Kent - keka wrote at 02/02/00 16:20 > > >Assume the (lowercase dominated) headings are asked (by the page author) > >to be of x-height 7 mm in Flemish Script, the body text (lowercase > >dominated) to be of x-height 3.5 mm Verdana. > > I think trying to specify type on screen in mm would be a > mistake, but... Works nicely. I've used it. Though obviously not for the x-height since that functionalit is not there (yet). > >Whatever font substitutions > >are done (keeping the asked-for x-heights to a reasonable degree), one > >would still get a proper percieved size difference between the heading > >and the body text. Right? Or??? > > Yes, great. What would the line-height be? For a clue on this The line height should be (asked to be) the same as the (nominal) Åp height for that font (&size), or slightly larger (as usual). Since the ascenders (and descenders) are unusually tall in that typeface, some ascender/descender overlap may still occur. But is that not a *desired* effect for *that font*? As it is for some other fonts as well (like the example in http://style.metrius.com/junk/emtolineheight.gif), where using the ""em"" height most certainly will produce (desired) overlaps. Note that I'm not claiming perfection for "unusual" typefaces (I never did). Kind regards /kent k
Received on Wednesday, 2 February 2000 12:48:04 UTC