Re[4]: [WSG] Question to the others ...
Sunday, November 14, 2004, 11:22:18 AM, Rob wrote: I find the description of font-size a bit dodgy, I agree. Defining a font size in terms of a unit that is based on a font size seems pretty stupid to me too, but that's how it is. There are lots of stupidities around. Here in the UK, we use words like referrer colour centre and so on. Seems that HTML is based on a foreign language. -- Iain ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re[4]: [WSG] Question to the others ...
Sunday, November 14, 2004, 11:40:17 AM, Iain wrote: Fourthly, There was a third, but I decided it was rubbish. Sorry, folks. -- Iain ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: Re[4]: [WSG] Question to the others ...
I find the description of font-size a bit dodgy, I agree. Defining a font size in terms of a unit that is based on a font size seems pretty stupid to me too, but that's how it is. There are lots of stupidities around. Well, in the print business, it's much more strict, which I prefer. There are so much more units that I do not know of, but I try to keep it clear in HTML too. That's hard with such inconsistencies. Here in the UK, we use words like referrer colour centre and so on. Seems that HTML is based on a foreign language. I prefer UK English. Everything web is just crappy English :/ But on topic, em is relative and is the width of an M. There you have it, but just don't mix it all up. There's a lot of confusion around fonts. (To illustrate, Word uses pts that are bigger than the ones in InDesign.) -- Cheers, Rob. ยป http://www.zooibaai.nl/b/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: Re[4]: [WSG] Question to the others ...
Hi folks, My first post, since I've worked in print longer than web. In print, an em (and en) are mostly used to describe dashes (of the width of M and N) in a font. So they are appropriate to the task when used for that. They have been slightly redefined for the web (since an en is not always half an en): An em is a unit of measurement defined as the point size of the font12 point type uses a 12 point em. An en is one-half of an em. http://www.alistapart.com/articles/emen/ Best regards, Marilyn Langfeld http://www.langfeldesigns.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Nov 14, 2004, at 6:48 AM, Iain Harrison wrote: Sunday, November 14, 2004, 11:22:18 AM, Rob wrote: I find the description of font-size a bit dodgy, I agree. Defining a font size in terms of a unit that is based on a font size seems pretty stupid to me too, but that's how it is. There are lots of stupidities around. Here in the UK, we use words like referrer colour centre and so on. Seems that HTML is based on a foreign language. -- Iain ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
