- From: Jelks Cabaniss <jelks@jelks.nu>
- Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2000 20:32:12 -0500 (EST)
- To: <www-style@w3.org>, <www-font@w3.org>
No matter what TeX says, classical typography's definition of an em-square or em-space has always been a square or space the specified size of the font, not the width or height of the letter M. TrueType (in general) echoes this. Using MS Word, I printed several 72 point Ms and em-dashes. The results when measured: 72pt Times Roman - M height: 48pt M width: 61pt em-dash : 72pt 72pt Arial - M height: 51pt M width: 50pt em-dash : 72pt In other words, the width of the em-dash is exactly the width of the font-size specified. This makes sense, and is the conventional way of doing it. In metal and phototypesetting, if you hit the "EM Space" key, you get a space exact X points wide -- where X is the specified point size. (Paragraphs in books and newspapers generally had a text-indent of one em-space, though sometimes it could be an em-space + an en-space, or even 2 or more em-spaces.). But the newer "web" fonts have a different idea of em-dash widths: 72pt Georgia - M height: 50pt M width: 61pt em-dash : 54pt 72pt Verdana - M height: 52pt M width: 47pt em-dash : 60pt I don't know where this is coming from. Are em-dashes (and, by extension em-spaces) now of variable width? /Jelks
Received on Thursday, 3 February 2000 10:20:39 UTC