On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 5:40 PM, Subsorama <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On 4 Sep 2008, at 21:34, Christian Montoya wrote: > >> >> On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 3:21 PM, Subsorama <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 4 Sep 2008, at 17:58, Christian Montoya wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 11:03 AM, spills <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I am sure this has been approached before but, the default 18px >>>>> baseline height is a horrible multiplier. Why not add 2 lousy >>>>> pixels >>>>> to make it 20px high? In layouts where I have added the 2px >>>>> addition, >>>>> they seem to work just fine and in Mac world look better in IMO. >>>>> There >>>>> is an added benefit of making it easier for clients to maintain >>>>> layout >>>>> baseline consistency as they can do math better with 20px rule more >>>>> so >>>>> than the 18px rule especially on really long layouts. >>>>> >>>>> Just my 2 cents. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks >>>>> >>>> >>>> Your 2 cents are understood, but the reason for the choice is to >>>> follow the typographic convention of 1.5, where the height of the >>>> line >>>> is 1.5 times the height of the text. You could change the line >>>> height >>>> to 20 px in your custom stylesheet, but then you wouldn't be able to >>>> impress the typography nerds with your attention to their >>>> conventions. >>> >>> There is no such convention, if that advice has been proffered to you >>> as a guide it is overly simplistic to the point of simply being bad >>> advice. >> >> Let's just step back for a moment. I wrote some of typography.css, and >> when I did, I followed the conventions discussed on this page: >> >> http://webtypography.net/Rhythm_and_Proportion/Vertical_Motion/2.2.2/ >> >> One important thing to understand is that while 12 px text height & 20 >> px line height might make it easier to do calculations for page >> designers, Blueprint is not offered as an "out-of-the-box" solution to >> page designers. It is offered as an out-of-the-box solution to people >> who know the very least about design, so as to help them make >> something attractive even if they don't know how.* For page designers, >> they know how to mess with their vertical rhythm, and are free to >> change it as they please. >> >> * This is my view, not the view of the entire core team. > > Okay, the fault might lies with Richard Rutter and his examples. His > sidenotes example differs from the book in that it states line heights > must match - whereas in the book the actual sidenotes are set much > tighter - and you can probably find examples of this everywhere. > Actually I see this is fixed in fancy type. He is still only providing > an example though and not single set formula which might be mistaken > for a convention. >
OK, I understand that it's not a convention, but you have to admit that 1.5 works really nicely as a convention because the line-height always comes out to a whole value when the font-size is an even number. So if you wanted to change the text size to a base of 14, your line-height would be 21, and if you wanted it to be 16, your line-height would be 24. If you have 12/20, or 1.667, then if you change your font-size to 14, your line height ends up being a decimal, which may or may not be rounded correctly. It would only come out to a whole value for font-sizes that are multiples of 3, which gives you less options. Just an idea... my point is that 12/18 doesn't make hand calculations easier but the fact that it's 1.5 makes the whole thing more flexible. -- -- Christian Montoya christianmontoya.net --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Blueprint CSS" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/blueprintcss?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
