- From: Gayle Kidder <reddik@sandiego.com>
- Date: Thu, 17 Jul 1997 16:25:28 -0700
- To: www-style@w3.org
David Perrell wrote: > Your test page is meaningless. You are comparing a reader-font-relative > size of 1em to an absolute size of 10pt. To make your test valid, add > this to the declaration: > > BODY { font-size: 10pt } > > Now, all of your em measurements should refer to the 10pt BODY (the > parent of P), and so 1em should equal 10pt for each of the fonts. I tried this and it doesn't matter a whit what I put in as BODY font-size. It all comes out the same. Which means it's ignoring the BODY setting, apparently. See a second demo at: http://www.beachmedia.com/www/emdemo2.html I've set the BODY font-size to a ridiculous 16 pts, but it doesn't affect the display at all in either browser, only the last para. > As to why you're getting a different relationship in MSIE and NSN -- is > the default font size exactly the same in both browsers? Remember, > since you did not explicitly set a size on BODY, your em measurements > are relative to the _default_ font size of the browser. That's the > whole point! The browsers were set to the same size, as far as one can guess (MSIE forgoes point size designations for smallest, small, medium, large, largest). I tried changing the default font and font size in both browsers. This only seemed to have an effect in Netscape, and only with a few odd font choices. > All you need to remember is that > > (1) 1em = 100% of the font size. > > (2) you have no way of knowing the point or pixel size of a client's > default font, therefore em or percent are the best way to give a reader > a font size relative to what she/he is accustomed to reading. But only with a proper conversion value.... which is my point (or pixel). Gayle Kidder
Received on Thursday, 17 July 1997 19:28:31 UTC