what do the old font size parameters mean in today's points and pixels?

[Laphan]

Hi All

Strange question this, but could somebody tell me what the old size=1,
size=2 .... to size=7 font parameters are in pixels and points.

I thought it was:

size 1 = 7 pt
size 2 = 14 pt
size 3 = 21 pt
etc .. (in multiples of 7)

but these values don't add up to me.

Any ideas?

Thanks

Laphan

[Bud]

Laphan wrote:

Hi All

Strange question this, but could somebody tell me what the old size=1,
size=2 .... to size=7 font parameters are in pixels and points.

I thought it was:

size 1 = 7 pt
size 2 = 14 pt
size 3 = 21 pt
etc .. (in multiples of 7)

but these values don't add up to me.
Any ideas?
http://www.elsid.co.za/download/css_fontsizes.htm
Thanks

Laphan

--
Nobody wants constructive criticism. It's all we can do to put up with
constructive praise

[Beauregard T. Shagnasty]

Laphan wrote:

Hi All
G'day.
Strange question this, but could somebody tell me what the old size=1,
size=2 .... to size=7 font parameters are in pixels and points.

It doesn't matter. Here in the 21st century, you should not be using
pixels and points (points are for printing). Use percentages and/or em
units instead.

http://k75s.home.att.net/fontsize.html

--
-bts
-Warning: I brake for lawn deer

[Neredbojias]

To further the education of mankind, "Laphan" <in**@SpamMeNot .co.uk>
vouchsafed:

Hi All

Strange question this, but could somebody tell me what the old size=1,
size=2 .... to size=7 font parameters are in pixels and points.

I thought it was:

size 1 = 7 pt
size 2 = 14 pt
size 3 = 21 pt
etc .. (in multiples of 7)

but these values don't add up to me.

Any ideas?

There is no fixed relationship and never was. In <font size="x">, x is
relative to the user's default font size.

--
Neredbojias
Infinity has its limits.

[Alan J. Flavell]

On Sat, 17 Jun 2006, Laphan wrote:

Strange question this,
Well, yes, considering all the discussion there has been recently
which, if you'd been paying attention, would have made it clear that
the question, in the way you posed it, can have no answer...
but could somebody tell me what the old size=1,
size=2 .... to size=7 font parameters are
http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/fonts.html#font-size-props

They are /suggested/ to be equivalent to certain CSS absolute keyword
sizes.

One should be aware that some browsers have used different
equivalences between HTML font size and CSS. I haven't followed the
details recently.
in pixels and points.
The whole reason for having different ways of specifying font size is
that they scale in different ways. You'll only find out how many
pixels your font is going to be /after/ you've put the keyword size
through a particular browser's algorithms, taking regard of the
particular presentation situation.
I thought it was:

size 1 = 7 pt
size 2 = 14 pt
size 3 = 21 pt
etc .. (in multiples of 7)
I don't know what the basis for such a thought could be. It seems to
fail several obvious reality checks.

When I view size=3 on our projection screen, then it most certainly
does not measure up to 21pt - and a good thing too!!
but these values don't add up to me.
They don't multiply either... SCNR
Any ideas?

The web is not printed on paper.

[Dr John Stockton]

JRS: In article <13************ *******@bgtnsc0 4-news.ops.worldn et.att.n
et>, dated Sat, 17 Jun 2006 19:51:25 remote, seen in news:comp.infos yste
ms.www.authoring.stylesheets, Beauregard T. Shagnasty
<a.*********@ex ample.invalid> posted :

Laphan wrote:

Strange question this, but could somebody tell me what the old size=1,
size=2 .... to size=7 font parameters are in pixels and points.

It doesn't matter.

Non sequitur. The OP may be wishing to update old code and wanting to
know the general meaning of those parameters in order to translate
appropriately.
Here in the 21st century, you should not be using
pixels and points (points are for printing). Use percentages and/or em
units instead.

--
© John Stockton, Surrey, UK. ?@merlyn.demon. co.uk Delphi 3 Turnpike 4 ©
<URL:http://www.merlyn.demo n.co.uk/> TP/BP/Delphi/&c., FAQqy topics & links;
<URL:http://www.bancoems.co m/CompLangPascalD elphiMisc-MiniFAQ.htm> clpdmFAQ;
<URL:http://www.borland.com/newsgroups/guide.html> news:borland.* Guidelines

[Jukka K. Korpela]

Dr John Stockton <jr*@merlyn.dem on.co.uk> scripsit:

The OP may be wishing to update old code and wanting to
know the general meaning of those parameters in order to translate
appropriately.

So what? Just wanting that doesn't make it possible - or desirable.

As a rule of thumb, <font> tags should simply be removed. Sometimes they are
used to imitate headings, and then you should decide on a suitable heading
markup. (It would be a gross error to use CSS instead.)

Trying to clean up existing markup that uses <font> markup (usually rather
heavily) is generally waste of time - or worse, since mistakes are
inevitable in the long run. Such pages typically need a rewrite, not
modifications. If you just want to maintain the information content, do so,
and leave the markup as it is. If you have resources to improve the
structure and markup, it is better to rewrite 10 frequently used pages than
to do some "cleanup" of 1,000 pages.

--
Jukka K. Korpela ("Yucca")
http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/

[Beauregard T. Shagnasty]

Dr John Stockton wrote:

Beauregard T. Shagnasty posted:

Laphan wrote:

Strange question this, but could somebody tell me what the old
size=1, size=2 .... to size=7 font parameters are in pixels and
points.
It doesn't matter.

Non sequitur.

It still doesn't matter.
The OP may be wishing to update old code and wanting to know the
general meaning of those parameters in order to translate
appropriately.

If, as Jukka explained, the OP is updating pages (and what other reason
would there be?), pixels and points should be scrapped, so there is no
need to know.

Here in the 21st century, you should not be using pixels and points
(points are for printing). Use percentages and/or em units instead.

No comment on that?

--
-bts
-Warning: I brake for lawn deer

[axlq]

In article <Qn************ ******@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldn et.att.net>,
Beauregard T. Shagnasty <a.*********@ex ample.invalid> wrote:

Here in the 21st century, you should not be using pixels and points
(points are for printing). Use percentages and/or em units instead.

No comment on that?

I'll comment on that:

I disagree!

Satisfied? :)

Although you're generally correct about pixel font sizes, there are
times when it's appropriate (as when you need to maintain a fixed
relationship with images -- which are also sized in pixels.

And I think point sizes are quite appropriate for web pages. 10
points should look like 10 points no matter what computer or display
you have. The fact that some operating systems don't render point
sizes properly doesn't make the usage "wrong."

-A

[Darin McGrew]

axlq <ax**@spamcop.n et> wrote:

And I think point sizes are quite appropriate for web pages. 10
points should look like 10 points no matter what computer or display
you have. The fact that some operating systems don't render point
sizes properly doesn't make the usage "wrong."

Yes, 10pt should be the same size in any browsing environment. (Well, any
browsing environment where points have meaning, that is.) But that's what
makes them inappropriate for use on the web, except perhaps in specialized
situations where the medium and display environment are known in detail.
--
Darin McGrew, mc****@stanford alumni.org, http://www.rahul.net/mcgrew/
Web Design Group, da***@htmlhelp. com, http://www.HTMLHelp.com/

"I'd love to make time, if only I could find the recipe."