- From: Bert Bos <bert@let.rug.nl>
- Date: Mon, 31 Jul 1995 15:43:07 +0200 (METDST)
- To: pbg@arbortext.com (Paul Grosso)
- Cc: www-style@w3.org
Paul Grosso writes |> From: Hakon Lie <Hakon.Lie@sophia.inria.fr> |> |> Typographers! |> |> If your font size is 12pt and the distance between base lines is 14 |> pt, is leading then 2pt or 14pt? The literature has diverging opinions |> on this, which -- if any -- is correct? | |Though both have at times been used, by far the more common in use |recently--especially in the computerized typesetting world--is the |latter, i.e., baseline-to-baseline measure, e.g., 14pt in your example. Can you find proof of that? I haven't been able to find any. On the other hand, I've seen four books, all written in the DTP era, that define leading as 2pt and only one that says 14pt. |TeX, the Output Specification (aka FOSIs), and DSSSL are among those |that measure "leading" as baseline-to-baseline. That's not correct. TeX doesn't use the term leading anywhere (except in the index, where the reader is referred to \baselineskip and \vskip). In fact, TeX has both \baselineskip (baseline-to-baseline distance) and \lineskip (extra space between lines) and a mechanism for choosing which of the two is used (\lineskiplimit). DSSSL doesn't have leading either, it specifies line spacing in a completely different way: pre-line-spacing (the minimum height of a line) and post-line-spacing (the minimum depth of a line) Another issue is that specifying the line feed might be more common way to express the layout, quite independent of how it is called. Bert -- Bert Bos Alfa-informatica <bert@let.rug.nl> Rijksuniversiteit Groningen <http://www.let.rug.nl/~bert/> Postbus 716, NL-9700 AS GRONINGEN
Received on Monday, 31 July 1995 09:43:20 UTC