- From: L. David Baron <dbaron@fas.harvard.edu>
- Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 17:43:38 -0500 (EST)
- To: dbaron@fas.harvard.edu, erik@netscape.com
- Cc: fahrner@pobox.com, www-style@w3.org
On Mon, 22 Nov 1999 13:57:55 -0800, erik@netscape.com (Erik van der Poel) wrote: > > OK. But if backwards compatibility is a consideration (and I think it > should be), then we cannot change the em, either. It should probably > continue to mean the max height of the font, if that's what most > installed copies of browsers do. The problem with that is that it's massively inconsistent, since the 'em' is just a particular type of <length>, and it would be rather strange to say that the 'em' means different things for different properties (since for all properties other that 'line-height', the 'em' reliably refers to the font-size requested). Furthermore, 'em' units for 'line-height' are unsafe, so their use should be discouraged anyway. -David L. David Baron Sophomore, Harvard (Physics) dbaron@fas.harvard.edu Links, SatPix, CSS, etc. <URL: http://www.fas.harvard.edu/~dbaron/ > WSP CSS AC <URL: http://www.webstandards.org/css/ >
Received on Monday, 22 November 1999 17:43:40 UTC