I've used mm because it's neither geeky nor is it jargon and you can use a tape measure to measure it.
For typefaces you'd probably have to try different values to make it look nice, but we do that with px and/or em. px: computers, geeky; em: printers, jargon. You can have fractions of a mm down to a px or em, too. Ted On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 08:35, mem <talofo.l...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello all, > > On my css layouts, I tend to use *em* for font size and *px* for all the > rest. > However, I wish not to follow this path any longer, since I wish to > embrace the *em* for [almost] all the development. > > Problem: we use a *960px grid* for styling most of our pages, so the > margin or paddings and widths are given on px, and if we convert those, > sometimes, we will get weird stuff like: 0.345 em. > > Question: Will it make sense to create a grid based on *em* ? > > The point is to allow us to start drawing more user friendly measures like > .5em or .4em and avoid .453 em stuff. > > What do you think ? > > Note: This is just a question, if it does make sense to you, just tell me > and explain me why so that I could understand and I can leave with that. > > > K. Regards, > mem > ______________________________________________________________________ > css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org] > http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d > List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ > List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html > Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/ > ______________________________________________________________________ css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
