- From: Stanimir Stamenkov <stanio@yahoo.com>
- Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 11:28:04 +0300
- To: www-style@w3.org
David Woolley wrote: >> 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. O.k. - my mistake. But it doesn't change the matter. >> lengths relative to the parent element's line height? (read as "relative to the current 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. > > [...] > > 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. Generally, I wasn't talking about bad author practices nor specifying line heights using absolute units. As I've stated previously it would be as just useful as using 'em's. -- Stanimir
Received on Monday, 29 September 2003 04:28:58 UTC