- From: Erik van der Poel <erik@netscape.com>
- Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 15:40:23 -0800
- To: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@fas.harvard.edu>
- CC: www-style@w3.org
> > > The reason I think this is a bad idea is that it is not backwards > > > compatible with most current behavior, and the current behavior makes > > > any line-height above 1.0 "safe" (i.e., it cannot cause overlap). > > The only browsers I see where it's unsafe are Opera 3.6 and WinIE5 [2]. You say "the only browsers" as if the *number* of browsers matters. It's not the number. It's their market share. Opera has a small market share, but WinIE5 has a large market share, so Web sites currently can't say "line-height: 1" safely. So the Web sites probably aren't saying that. So it's safe to have CSS specify that "line-height: 1em" means the height of the em square, not the bounding box. > This approach doesn't make CSS any less flexible. Everything that was > possible before is still possible. In fact, I would argue that it > makes suggesting small line-heights possible while it is not possible > the other way, since authors need not fear overlap if a font is > substituted because the suggested font is unavailable. CSS should be > geared towards making it easier for the author to suggest styles that > make sense across platforms. What about "line-height: normal"? Erik > [2] http://www.fas.harvard.edu/~dbaron/css/fonts/sizes/
Received on Thursday, 2 December 1999 18:43:17 UTC