Re: Request for adjustable font-size: line-fit

On Aug 22, 2013, at 1:28 AM, Gunther Pilz <gunther.pilz@gmail.com> wrote:

>> It does make more sense if this was only a shrink-to-fit behavior. Your font-size would be your font size unless it didn't fit.
> 
> No, I disagree.
> Mainly for one reason that is the "fallback" for non-supporting UAs.
> 
> Following your proposal the author always has to set the font-size to a higher
> value (or to the 'max-font-size).
> So the font-size will be too large in non-supporting UAs.

What I meant was, the shrink to fit behavior would be good for the very important use case of authors who mainly want to ensure that possibly too-long text would still fit on one line. The use case of people wanting text to fill the block even if it was too short would not be served by my proposal. 

> This could be avoided if the new feature will be "expand + shrink-to fit"
> instead of just "shrink".
> Think about the Flexbox modul - it is quite the same "functionality".

If that is done with 'font-size:fit', then do you expand each word to fit, or do you shrink each paragraph to fit? Or what?

For this type of feature, this sounds more like text justification to me. It makes more sense to me to have something like 'text-justify:scale' (and 'text-justify: scale-x' for synthetic condensing and expanding). Thus, the lines are laid out as normal for whatever font-size is specified, but then instead of distributing space to get to 'text-align:justify', you scale the glyphs instead. As with all flavors of 'text-align:justify' and 'text-justify', the text starts on the very left and ends on the very right (in horizontal writing), which is what you want. 

http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-text/#text-justify

Received on Thursday, 22 August 2013 17:00:20 UTC