- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2012 10:44:46 -0800
- To: Jon Rimmer <jon.rimmer@gmail.com>
- Cc: "www-style@w3.org Style" <www-style@w3.org>
On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 9:37 AM, Jon Rimmer <jon.rimmer@gmail.com> wrote: > On 10 January 2012 17:23, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 9:19 AM, Jon Rimmer <jon.rimmer@gmail.com> wrote: >>> I played around with the example, and even removing padding completely >>> on the list items, I couldn't seem to get them all on one line with >>> the default font. The font sizes are just too different. >> >> That's curious. It worked great for me. >> >> ~TJ > > I dunno, this is what I see: > > http://www.brillskills.com/img/with-font.png > http://www.brillskills.com/img/no-font.png > > Are you sure you didn't accidentally disable the 125%/1.3 size > declaration in the font property when you removed the MelbourneRegular > reference? Whoops, that's exactly what I did. Yeah, when I keep that set correctly, the text is just too wide in the system sans-serif. Dang. (Note that your result is because the <li>s are still set to display:inline, so they're all put together inside of a single table-cell or flexbox item. If you turn off that line or set them to display:block or list-item, they'll stay on one line, but they'll all run together and slightly overflow.) So yeah, Matthew, your example does indeed need more than what I thought. Your font is so narrow! ~TJ
Received on Tuesday, 10 January 2012 18:45:36 UTC