- From: Tiro Typeworks <tiro@tiro.com>
- Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 13:50:37 -0500 (EST)
- To: Karlsson Kent - keka <keka@im.se>
- cc: www-style@w3.org, "'www-font@w3.org'" <www-font@w3.org>
While I'm not about to get into a discussion os CSS, about which I know very little, I would like to point out that the term 'em' has been used in English language typography for 250+ years to refer to a horizontal unit of measure equal to the body height of type at a given point size. Hence, 16pt type has an em width of 16 points. It is in this sense that the term is still used by font developers although, obviously, digital glyphs are no longer strictly bound by the confines of the body height. Although the term em derives from the pronunciation of the letter M, it was never traditionally used to refer to the width of that letter, which would vary considerably, of course, from typeface to typeface and from font to font. This is attested to by the fact that individual metal fonts did not come with separately cast metal slugs equal in width to the letter M; rather, compositors would have cases of standard em and en slugs for each point size. Increasingly, in digital font development, the term em is also used to refer to the scaleable body height; such that, in TrueType font development, we speak of a 2048 unit em, and in Type 1 PS of a 1000 unit em, referring to the most common design grids of these font formats. I leave it to you to figure out how this relates to CSS, but if TEX and any other system is using the term em to refer to the width of the letter M, this is due to a misunderstanding. John Hudson Tiro Typeworks Vancouver, BC www.tiro.com
Received on Monday, 31 January 2000 17:50:56 UTC