Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

em

Expand Messages
  • Joshua Kimmel
    Hi everybody, Anybody ever try to use the em unit in FOP to make table sizes more scalable? I m messing with something like this.
    Message 1 of 11 , May 10 6:29 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi everybody,

      Anybody ever try to use the em unit in FOP to make table sizes more
      scalable?

      I'm messing with something like this.

      <fo:table-column column-width="67.0em"/>

      In a perfect world, this should allow the column size to be 67 units the
      size of the capital M in the current font. However, the support for this,
      while it is present, seems inconsistent. My question really, is how do I
      set a font in such a way that the FOP engine recognizes it as being the
      parent font?
      I don't want to go back to my old scheme of setting a font size variable in
      milimeters and then multiplying it for the sizes I need.

      Josh

      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
      Joshua E. Kimmel
      Content Developer
      IAM Technology, LLC
      Westerville, OH USA
      PH 614.899.0885 ex.111
      Email kimmel@...
    • Bryan Rasmussen
      the question is if you re viewing your pdf on screen? cause em is a printers measure, print them out and see if you still have the same problem. em is, as far
      Message 2 of 11 , May 10 6:59 AM
      • 0 Attachment
        the question is if you're viewing your pdf on screen? cause em is a printers
        measure, print them out and see if you still have the same problem. em is,
        as far as I know, meaningless in a web situation cause it changes dependent
        on users' screen resolutions
        -----Original Message-----
        From: Joshua Kimmel [mailto:kimmel@...]
        Sent: 10. maj 2001 15:30
        To: XSL-FO@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: [XSL-FO] em


        Hi everybody,

        Anybody ever try to use the em unit in FOP to make table sizes more
        scalable?

        I'm messing with something like this.

        <fo:table-column column-width="67.0em"/>

        In a perfect world, this should allow the column size to be 67 units the
        size of the capital M in the current font. However, the support for this,
        while it is present, seems inconsistent. My question really, is how do I
        set a font in such a way that the FOP engine recognizes it as being the
        parent font?
        I don't want to go back to my old scheme of setting a font size variable in
        milimeters and then multiplying it for the sizes I need.

        Josh

        ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
        Joshua E. Kimmel
        Content Developer
        IAM Technology, LLC
        Westerville, OH USA
        PH 614.899.0885 ex.111
        Email kimmel@...


        To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
        XSL-FO-unsubscribe@egroups.com



        Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
      • John E. Simpson
        ... Eh? Is that true? My understanding was that an em s meaning was dependent on font size, no matter what the medium. While in absolute terms, an em (in a
        Message 3 of 11 , May 10 7:14 AM
        • 0 Attachment
          Bryan Rasmussen wrote:

          > the question is if you're viewing your pdf on screen? cause em is a printers
          > measure, print them out and see if you still have the same problem. em is,
          > as far as I know, meaningless in a web situation cause it changes dependent
          > on users' screen resolutions

          Eh? Is that true? My understanding was that an em's "meaning" was
          dependent on font size, no matter what the medium. While in absolute
          terms, an em (in a given font size) on a low-res screen might be larger
          than an em (in the same font size) on a high-res printed page,
          *proportional to the font size in that medium* the two ems would still
          be the "same."
          ???
          ================================================================
          John E. Simpson | "I accidentally installed the deer
          http://www.flixml.org | whistles on my car backwards. Now
          XML Q&A: www.xml.com | everywhere I go, I'm chased by deer."
          | (Steven Wright)
        • Joshua Kimmel
          I understand your point, except that whether I m viewing it on a screen or printing it out doesn t really affect how fop generates the pdf, which is what I m
          Message 4 of 11 , May 10 7:16 AM
          • 0 Attachment
            I understand your point, except that whether I'm viewing it on a screen or
            printing it out doesn't really affect how fop generates the pdf, which is
            what I'm writing about. When I use the em, FOP doesn't generate the pdf
            with the column sizes like I'd expect. Usually much larger then I expect. I
            know in CSS that if you don't have a parent font, then the browser uses the
            users system font. Is this true of FOP?



            the question is if you're viewing your pdf on screen? cause em is a printers
            measure, print them out and see if you still have the same problem. em is,
            as far as I know, meaningless in a web situation cause it changes dependent
            on users' screen resolutions
            -----Original Message-----
            From: Joshua Kimmel [mailto:kimmel@...]
            Sent: 10. maj 2001 15:30
            To: XSL-FO@yahoogroups.com
            Subject: [XSL-FO] em


            Hi everybody,

            Anybody ever try to use the em unit in FOP to make table sizes more
            scalable?

            I'm messing with something like this.

            <fo:table-column column-width="67.0em"/>

            In a perfect world, this should allow the column size to be 67 units the
            size of the capital M in the current font. However, the support for this,
            while it is present, seems inconsistent. My question really, is how do I
            set a font in such a way that the FOP engine recognizes it as being the
            parent font?
            I don't want to go back to my old scheme of setting a font size variable in
            milimeters and then multiplying it for the sizes I need.

            Josh

            ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
            Joshua E. Kimmel
            Content Developer
            IAM Technology, LLC
            Westerville, OH USA
            PH 614.899.0885 ex.111
            Email kimmel@...


            To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
            XSL-FO-unsubscribe@egroups.com



            Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/




            To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
            XSL-FO-unsubscribe@egroups.com



            Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
          • Bryan Rasmussen
            hmm maybe I m mistaken, my understanding was that em should be used with the @media print declaration in css as it didn t make any sense outside of a printed
            Message 5 of 11 , May 10 8:28 AM
            • 0 Attachment
              hmm maybe I'm mistaken, my understanding was that em should be used with the
              @media print declaration in css as it didn't make any sense outside of a
              printed medium. Of course I just might have accepted some pedant's prejudice
              as being true, without thouroughly investigating the matter, although I've
              noticed that anytime I use em outside of print it totally screws everything.

              -----Original Message-----
              From: John E. Simpson [mailto:simpson@...]
              Sent: 10. maj 2001 16:14
              To: XSL-FO@yahoogroups.com
              Subject: Re: [XSL-FO] em


              Bryan Rasmussen wrote:

              > the question is if you're viewing your pdf on screen? cause em is a
              printers
              > measure, print them out and see if you still have the same problem. em is,
              > as far as I know, meaningless in a web situation cause it changes
              dependent
              > on users' screen resolutions

              Eh? Is that true? My understanding was that an em's "meaning" was
              dependent on font size, no matter what the medium. While in absolute
              terms, an em (in a given font size) on a low-res screen might be larger
              than an em (in the same font size) on a high-res printed page,
              *proportional to the font size in that medium* the two ems would still
              be the "same."
              ???
              ================================================================
              John E. Simpson | "I accidentally installed the deer
              http://www.flixml.org | whistles on my car backwards. Now
              XML Q&A: www.xml.com | everywhere I go, I'm chased by deer."
              | (Steven Wright)


              To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
              XSL-FO-unsubscribe@egroups.com



              Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
            • Christopher R. Maden
              ... I m not sure what CSS has to do with this; we re talking about XSL here. An em started as the size of the metal body of an M in a typeface,
              Message 6 of 11 , May 14 6:17 AM
              • 0 Attachment
                At 08:28 10-05-2001, Bryan Rasmussen wrote:
                >hmm maybe I'm mistaken, my understanding was that em should be used with the
                >@media print declaration in css as it didn't make any sense outside of a
                >printed medium. Of course I just might have accepted some pedant's prejudice
                >as being true, without thouroughly investigating the matter, although I've
                >noticed that anytime I use em outside of print it totally screws everything.

                <confusion/>

                I'm not sure what CSS has to do with this; we're talking about XSL here.

                An "em" started as the size of the metal body of an M in a typeface, but
                has now come to mean a linear unit of measurement equal to the current font
                size. When working with a twelve-point font, 1 em == 12 pt. This should
                work equally well in print or on-line, and is in fact preferable to
                absolute measurement on-line, since all measurements will scale if the user
                changes his or her preferred font size.

                But this question was about FOP. FOP produces PDF, which is a static
                format designed for printing. Even when viewed on line, the text still
                can't be resized, and so therefore an em doesn't change.

                -Chris
                --
                Christopher R. Maden, XML Consultant
                DTDs/schemas - conversion - ebooks - publishing - Web - B2B - training
                <URL: http://crism.maden.org/consulting/ >
                PGP Fingerprint: BBA6 4085 DED0 E176 D6D4 5DFC AC52 F825 AFEC 58DA
              • Joshua Kimmel
                If that s true about using the em, that it doesn t change based on the font sizes with in my fo document, then that s cool. I won t use it. But if that s
                Message 7 of 11 , May 14 6:38 AM
                • 0 Attachment
                  If that's true about using the em, that it doesn't change based on the font
                  sizes with in my fo document, then that's cool. I won't use it. But if
                  that's true, then I'm confused as to why the FOP designers provide any
                  support for it at all, which they seem to do, just strange inconsistent
                  support.
                  I guess I was just hoping to see if anyone knew how to set the font in one
                  place in the fo document, such that using em would recognize it as the
                  parent font of the document and therefore whenever I change the font size or
                  style, it would change the preferred sizes of the wherever I had used the em
                  unit.

                  My old method was to measure the width of the "M" in whatever font manually,
                  then code it in as a variable, and then just multiply by it wherever I
                  needed to maintain a size of say exactly 60 characters in the specified
                  font.

                  Additionally, I haven't found anything that says that the current use of the
                  em unit is equal to the fonts current size. CSS books still claims its use
                  as being equal to the M of the current font, and fop's support for the em
                  unit doesn't hold up to that either.

                  Josh

                  _________________
                  Josh Kimmel
                  Content Developer
                  iam technology


                  ******************************************
                  <confusion/>

                  I'm not sure what CSS has to do with this; we're talking about XSL here.

                  An "em" started as the size of the metal body of an M in a typeface, but
                  has now come to mean a linear unit of measurement equal to the current font
                  size. When working with a twelve-point font, 1 em == 12 pt. This should
                  work equally well in print or on-line, and is in fact preferable to
                  absolute measurement on-line, since all measurements will scale if the user
                  changes his or her preferred font size.

                  But this question was about FOP. FOP produces PDF, which is a static
                  format designed for printing. Even when viewed on line, the text still
                  can't be resized, and so therefore an em doesn't change.

                  -Chris
                  --
                  Christopher R. Maden, XML Consultant
                  DTDs/schemas - conversion - ebooks - publishing - Web - B2B - training
                  <URL: http://crism.maden.org/consulting/ >
                  PGP Fingerprint: BBA6 4085 DED0 E176 D6D4 5DFC AC52 F825 AFEC 58DA


                  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                  XSL-FO-unsubscribe@egroups.com



                  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                • Tony Graham
                  ... From the XSL CR: 5.9.7.2. Relative Lengths A relative length is a unit-based value that is measured against the current value of the font-size property.
                  Message 8 of 11 , May 14 6:50 AM
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Joshua Kimmel wrote at 14 May 2001 09:38:47 -0400:
                    > Additionally, I haven't found anything that says that the current use of the
                    > em unit is equal to the fonts current size. CSS books still claims its use
                    > as being equal to the M of the current font, and fop's support for the em
                    > unit doesn't hold up to that either.

                    From the XSL CR:

                    5.9.7.2. Relative Lengths

                    A relative length is a unit-based value that is measured against
                    the current value of the font-size property.

                    There is only one relative unit of measure, the "em". The
                    definition of "1em" is equal to the current font size. For example,
                    a value of "1.25em" is 1.25 times the current font size.

                    When an em measurement is used in an expression, it is converted
                    according to the font-size value of the current property's
                    context. The result of the expression is an absolute length. See §
                    7.7.4 font-size on page 193

                    Regards,


                    Tony Graham
                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                    Tony Graham mailto:tony.graham@...
                    Sun Microsystems Ireland Ltd Phone: +353 1 8199708
                    Hamilton House, East Point Business Park, Dublin 3 x(70)19708
                  • Joshua Kimmel
                    Hey, now that s some good information. Thank you for pointing it out to me. Josh ... From: Tony Graham [mailto:Tony.Graham@ireland.sun.com] Sent: Monday, May
                    Message 9 of 11 , May 14 6:56 AM
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Hey, now that's some good information. Thank you for pointing it out to me.

                      Josh

                      -----Original Message-----
                      From: Tony Graham [mailto:Tony.Graham@...]
                      Sent: Monday, May 14, 2001 9:51 AM
                      To: XSL-FO@yahoogroups.com
                      Subject: RE: [XSL-FO] em


                      Joshua Kimmel wrote at 14 May 2001 09:38:47 -0400:
                      > Additionally, I haven't found anything that says that the current use of
                      the
                      > em unit is equal to the fonts current size. CSS books still claims its
                      use
                      > as being equal to the M of the current font, and fop's support for the em
                      > unit doesn't hold up to that either.

                      >From the XSL CR:

                      5.9.7.2. Relative Lengths

                      A relative length is a unit-based value that is measured against
                      the current value of the font-size property.

                      There is only one relative unit of measure, the "em". The
                      definition of "1em" is equal to the current font size. For example,
                      a value of "1.25em" is 1.25 times the current font size.

                      When an em measurement is used in an expression, it is converted
                      according to the font-size value of the current property's
                      context. The result of the expression is an absolute length. See §
                      7.7.4 font-size on page 193

                      Regards,


                      Tony Graham
                      ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                      Tony Graham mailto:tony.graham@...
                      Sun Microsystems Ireland Ltd Phone: +353 1 8199708
                      Hamilton House, East Point Business Park, Dublin 3 x(70)19708

                      To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                      XSL-FO-unsubscribe@egroups.com



                      Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                    • Christopher R. Maden
                      ... An em-spec d measurement can t change *while viewing* a PDF, because the font size can t change. When formatting a document
                      Message 10 of 11 , May 14 7:00 AM
                      • 0 Attachment
                        At 06:38 14-05-2001, Joshua Kimmel wrote:
                        >If that's true about using the em, that it doesn't change based on the font
                        >sizes with in my fo document, then that's cool.

                        <confusion amount="more"/>

                        An em-spec'd measurement can't change *while viewing* a PDF, because the
                        font size can't change. When formatting a document using XSL, 1 em will
                        always be the current font size. It won't *change* as such, over time, but
                        1 em will mean different lengths in different FOs, depending on the font
                        size in use for that FO.

                        >My old method was to measure the width of the "M" in whatever font manually,
                        >then code it in as a variable, and then just multiply by it wherever I
                        >needed to maintain a size of say exactly 60 characters in the specified
                        >font.

                        Ah. An average character width, unless you're using a fixed-pitch
                        typeface, is not going to be 1 em. It will vary based on the face itself;
                        a good way to take the measure is to type out the lowercase alphabet in
                        that face and measure it.

                        >Additionally, I haven't found anything that says that the current use of the
                        >em unit is equal to the fonts current size.

                        I believe Tony's quote from the spec fulfilled that. Out of curiousity:
                        where were you looking?

                        >CSS books still claims its use
                        >as being equal to the M of the current font, and fop's support for the em
                        >unit doesn't hold up to that either.

                        Section 4.3.2 of CSS 2 says "em: the 'font-size' of the relevant font";
                        section 6.1 of CSS 1 says much the same. If books about CSS disagree with
                        the spec, they're wrong. In any case, we're dealing with XSL, which
                        addresses a slightly different domain from CSS, and expectations based on
                        CSS may prove misleading.

                        -Chris
                        --
                        Christopher R. Maden, XML Consultant
                        DTDs/schemas - conversion - ebooks - publishing - Web - B2B - training
                        <URL: http://crism.maden.org/consulting/ >
                        PGP Fingerprint: BBA6 4085 DED0 E176 D6D4 5DFC AC52 F825 AFEC 58DA
                      • Joshua Kimmel
                        I appreciate the information I ve been given. I believe I have been schooled effectively. :) 1st lesson learned. Read spec more carefully. 2nd lesson.
                        Message 11 of 11 , May 14 7:15 AM
                        • 0 Attachment
                          I appreciate the information I've been given. I believe I have been
                          "schooled" effectively. :)

                          1st lesson learned. Read spec more carefully.
                          2nd lesson. Don't trust all CSS information to be mostly true in FO.
                          3rd lesson. read better books.

                          Now that I feel I have a better understanding of the em in the FO realm, has
                          anybody used it in FOP?

                          I mean, if I'm using it to determine a column width, and I have multiple
                          fonts and sizes within my document, how do I code so a specific font is
                          within the scope of that column width?

                          Josh


                          At 06:38 14-05-2001, Joshua Kimmel wrote:
                          >If that's true about using the em, that it doesn't change based on the font
                          >sizes with in my fo document, then that's cool.

                          <confusion amount="more"/>

                          An em-spec'd measurement can't change *while viewing* a PDF, because the
                          font size can't change. When formatting a document using XSL, 1 em will
                          always be the current font size. It won't *change* as such, over time, but
                          1 em will mean different lengths in different FOs, depending on the font
                          size in use for that FO.

                          >My old method was to measure the width of the "M" in whatever font
                          manually,
                          >then code it in as a variable, and then just multiply by it wherever I
                          >needed to maintain a size of say exactly 60 characters in the specified
                          >font.

                          Ah. An average character width, unless you're using a fixed-pitch
                          typeface, is not going to be 1 em. It will vary based on the face itself;
                          a good way to take the measure is to type out the lowercase alphabet in
                          that face and measure it.

                          >Additionally, I haven't found anything that says that the current use of
                          the
                          >em unit is equal to the fonts current size.

                          I believe Tony's quote from the spec fulfilled that. Out of curiousity:
                          where were you looking?

                          >CSS books still claims its use
                          >as being equal to the M of the current font, and fop's support for the em
                          >unit doesn't hold up to that either.

                          Section 4.3.2 of CSS 2 says "em: the 'font-size' of the relevant font";
                          section 6.1 of CSS 1 says much the same. If books about CSS disagree with
                          the spec, they're wrong. In any case, we're dealing with XSL, which
                          addresses a slightly different domain from CSS, and expectations based on
                          CSS may prove misleading.

                          -Chris
                          --
                          Christopher R. Maden, XML Consultant
                          DTDs/schemas - conversion - ebooks - publishing - Web - B2B - training
                          <URL: http://crism.maden.org/consulting/ >
                          PGP Fingerprint: BBA6 4085 DED0 E176 D6D4 5DFC AC52 F825 AFEC 58DA


                          To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                          XSL-FO-unsubscribe@egroups.com



                          Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.