- From: Walter Ian Kaye <walter@natural-innovations.com>
- Date: Mon, 11 Aug 1997 04:23:02 -0700
- To: <www-style@w3.org>, <www-html@w3.org>
At 11:12a +0100 08/11/97, Clive Bruton wrote: > Peter Flynn wrote at 11/8/97 10:59 am > > >> While that's a good definition, typesetting practice /never/ uses "em" > >> as vertical measurement; an em is a horizontal measurement only, and an > >> "ex" is the vertical measurement. This makes measurements based on > >> fonts size work with compressed an/or fat fonts. > > > >This is incorrect: pica ems are used for page depth and line spacing > >almost universally in the Anglo-American world. When did you last see > >a comp's spec specify print-area height in "ex"s? > > > 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. > The correct term for a 12pt > em is a *pica* em as pointed out, an em is a relative unit. I've never heard of a "pica em" -- only just "pica" (1/6 of an inch), and picas are indeed used for both horizontal and vertical. __________________________________________________________________________ Walter Ian Kaye <boo_at_best*com> Programmer - Excel, AppleScript, Mountain View, CA ProTERM, FoxPro, HTML http://www.natural-innovations.com/ Musician - Guitarist, Songwriter
Received on Monday, 11 August 1997 07:23:30 UTC