- From: Erik van der Poel <erik@netscape.com>
- Date: Sat, 20 Nov 1999 16:25:02 -0800
- To: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>, dbaron@fas.harvard.edu
- CC: www-style@w3.org
Chris Lilley wrote: > > Erik van der Poel wrote: > > > > I'm still concerned about CSS's "font-size". The CSS2 spec > > where, exactly? Sorry, I got the impression that font-size included accents from a number of members of this mailing list, not from the spec. I resorted to this mailing list because the spec wasn't very clear. I would appreciate it if you would update the spec to include some clarification saying that the font-size relates to the "em square", which is used by the font designer as a guideline, and that certain glyphs may actually bleed outside their em square. (Or words to that effect.) > > and several > > members of the CSS community seem to indicate that the CSS font-size > > includes not only the descenders and ascenders, but also any accents > > that might be placed on top of glyphs (e.g. capital E with acute > > accent). > > The CSS2 spec talks quite plainly about the ascent being the maximum > unaccenmted height of the font. But does it also plainly indicate the relationship between ascent and font-size? If so, where exactly? > > If the new Mozilla code base suddenly > > switches to positive lfHeight values (to comply with CSS2), > > I don't see how it would make it comply with CSS2. Sorry, I didn't really know what CSS2 expected of me in this area. I would like to get Mozilla to pass Baron's font-size test: http://www.fas.harvard.edu/~dbaron/css/fonts/sizes/ According to the following document, Mozilla fails the font size test: http://www.fas.harvard.edu/~dbaron/css/test/results But I'm starting to think that the Windows version of Mozilla handles font-size correctly. David? Erik
Received on Saturday, 20 November 1999 19:27:36 UTC