- From: Hakon Lie <howcome@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 11 Aug 1997 14:55:51 +0200 (MET DST)
- To: Peter Flynn <pflynn@imbolc.ucc.ie>
- Cc: www-html@w3.org
Peter Flynn writes: > > > Correct, the definition of an "em" is a *square* of any given body size, > > > ie 9pt*9pt, 24pt*24pt, 72pt*72pt are all ems. > > > > And here I thought an em was a square the width of an uppercase "M". > > Silly me. > > Not silly. It _was_ once the width of an M, at some time in the past > when an M was assumed to be as wide as it was high. While you're online Peter, do you know when and why (technolgy?) this changed? Also, since the body size includes the descender (which "M" doesn't have) this change increased the size of an em, right? -h&kon H å k o n W i u m L i e howcome@w3.org http://www.w3.org/people/howcome World W i d e Web Consortium
Received on Monday, 11 August 1997 08:55:59 UTC