Gunlaug Sørtun wrote: > Yes, it is. OTOH: any calculator will do :-) Hehe, makes sense. :: Blushes ::
I guess I was mesmerized by the GUI > Some round up and some round down, and some won't round at all. Some > even dump all the em-decimals while they're at it. It even depends on > how large an em-value you serve them. Ah, wow... kinda sounds scary. It must be hard to perfect EM-based layouts/coding. > I wouldn't use em if one of the requirements is "pixel-precision" down > to the last pixel. That's what pixel, and all those box model hacks, are > for. Very good point. The more I think about it, the more I am impressed by the new Yahoo homepage... those web folks on the Yahoo dev team did an amazing job. >> What is the actual math to do the PX > EM conversion? > > Pixel-width divided by (relevant) font-size in pixels = EM. > So, if (relevant) font-size is 16px and width is 700px, then you have: > 700/16=43.75. Very clear explanation, thank you for explaining the calculations. :) > Now, change font-size and recalculate... Pheew, I do not think I will ever fully get a grasp on relative (proper term?) layouts... Heck, I feel like I just started getting the hang of a floated pixel-based layout... so much to learn, so little time. :( THanks Georg, I really appreciate your help! :D Have a great day, Cheers, Micky ______________________________________________________________________ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d IE7b2 testing hub -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/?page=IE7 List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
