- From: John Hudson <tiro@tiro.com>
- Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2013 08:58:35 -0700
- To: Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>, Alan Gresley <alan@css-class.com>
- CC: W3C Style <www-style@w3.org>
On 17/10/13 10:34 PM, Glenn Adams wrote: > Actually, the spec means font size not font [family] when it says > rendered in more than one font. Otherwise, it wouldn't say the largest > font*size*. Font family is not related to line height computation. It is if the line height is being computed from in-font metrics (OS/2 WinAscent and WinDescent values, OS/2 Typo values, or corresponding hhea table values), which is what the line-height spec indicates. I presumed that the spec in this instance meant 'largest vertical metrics' when it says 'largest font size', but agree that this could be clearer. This is a topic discussed at some length during development of the Composite Font Representation (ISO/IEC 14496-28:2012), and as in that case the only safe method is to use the largest individual metrics values from each of the fonts involved (bearing in mind that metrics may affect not only line height but also glyph clipping zones). This means that the appropriate above-baseline metric and below-baseline metric may come from different fonts in the line, especially if different writing systems are involved. For example, combining Vietnamese and Burmese text on the same line will almost certainly require taking the ascender height from the Vietnamese font and the descender depth from the Burmese font, because of the way in which these two writing systems make use of vertical space. JH
Received on Friday, 18 October 2013 15:59:21 UTC