W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > November 1999

Re: font-size and accents, again

From: Erik van der Poel <erik@netscape.com>
Date: Sat, 20 Nov 1999 16:25:02 -0800
Message-ID: <38373BDE.686141F2@netscape.com>
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:


According to the following document, Mozilla fails the font size test:


But I'm starting to think that the Windows version of Mozilla handles
font-size correctly. David?

Received on Saturday, 20 November 1999 19:27:36 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:26:52 UTC