On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 4:48 AM, Richard Mason <whitne...@xtra.co.nz> wrote: > > I'm not sure I understand that sentence, but I think you would agree that it > is desirable to state in information sources on this topic that x-height > varies with font size, and a reason why as you have indicated. From there > one could perhaps reasonably say that it isn't particularly important, and > if the value can not be deduced the browser invents one but I certainly > don't think that sources should invent values, like the CSS spec used to, > and say they are fixed. People read these documents, take the false data as > fact carved in stone, and then repeat it in books and articles that are read > for years.
I don't think that in this particular case the CSS specs are giving so "false" data. It's common to speak of x-height ratio as a font unique ratio, see for example this definition [1], with its detail "typically with 1000 or 2048 units to the Em". The "oscillations" that we see at small font sizes are a sort of accident, caused by limitations imposed by a coarse grid, which may or may not be important. Regards, Bruno [1] http://typophile.com/node/12028 -- Bruno Fassino http://www.brunildo.org/test ______________________________________________________________________ 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/
