- From: Jonathan Watt <jwatt@jwatt.org>
- Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2007 11:44:45 +0100
- To: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
- Cc: www-svg@w3.org
Chris Lilley wrote: > On Thursday, February 8, 2007, 4:20:10 AM, Jonathan wrote: > > JW> Chris Lilley wrote: >>> JW> Defining the term "glyph cell" inside the definition for "bounding box" is the >>> JW> wrong place to do it. In my opinion this sentence: >>> >>> JW> For example, for horizontal text, the calculations must assume >>> JW> that each glyph extends vertically to the full ascent and descent >>> JW> values for the font. >>> >>> Which is therefore talking of the em square, not the glyph cell. > > JW> Here I'm confused. You just said "glyph cell" is not the same as em square, but > JW> here the text seems to be defining glyph cell. > > Yes, I'm agreeing with you that its using the wrong term for what it > is trying to say. Ah, gotcha. I was originally asking for it to be removed because I thought it should have it's own definition - not because I thought it was actually wrong. Hence my confusion. :-) Thanks, Jonathan
Received on Thursday, 8 February 2007 10:44:59 UTC