- From: David Woolley <david@djwhome.demon.co.uk>
- Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 07:28:30 +0100 (BST)
- To: www-style@w3.org
> Would it be good if there's a unit just like 'em' (where you specify > a length relative to the parent element's font size) to specify This is wrong. em refers to the current element except when setting the font size. > lengths relative to the parent element's line height? I can't see any value in this except as a case of a more general mechanism to reference the computed value of any length valued property, and even then I think one is getting into bloat and risks problems with circularity of reference. Line height height should almost always be specified relative to the font size, even more so than font sizes should be specified relative to other font sizes and ultimately the user's preferred font size. This is especially true given the way that accessibility features work on current browsers. Whilst I've noticed that specifying absolute values for line heights seems to be one of this year's design fashions, it interacts badly with using the ignore author font sizes option in browsers which is necessary to counter last year's fashion of microscopic font sizes (and the fact that browsers often clip scaling down of the font to maintain at least a 7 by 5 raster, even without accessibility options). My current experience is that many pages now display with lines too close together to read comfortably, even when using an IE medium font size. In some cases the lines overlap - this happens for the error messages from one of the Microsoft proxy servers. IE, which has most of the market, only locks the font size when one disables author sizes, so a line height that is not specified in em's will go wrong.
Received on Monday, 29 September 2003 02:28:33 UTC