Sent by Tim Climis on 24 January 2012 22:10
> From my this, it really visually appears as if the em is not an "m" or an "M" in
> even the most plain typeface. That's when the text is centered. If it's left or
> right aligned, you can fit in two more "m".
As has been discussed before in this thread, em is not a horizontal measure. It is a vertical
measure, and is defined as the size of the font.
Directly from the CSS 1 spec (just to show that it's always been defined this way - at least in CSS)
"ems, the height of the element's font" http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS1/#units
The CSS 2.1 spec gets more precise, particularly in regard to x-height.
http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/REC-CSS2-20110607/syndata.html#length-units
It was (a really long time ago, and only a really long time ago *in print*) a measure of the width
of a capital M. It has been (and is defined in the CSS spec as) the font height for quite a while.
> more interestingly, I looked at the "computed size" in Chrome, and it
> reported that the div had a calculated size of 140px.
>
That's not interesting at all. That's expected. The font-size is 14px (you set it to that). 1 em
is the font-size. So 10em would be 14px x 10=140px.
______________________________________________________________________
css-discuss [EMAIL-REMOVED]]
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/
