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

RE: [XSL-FO] em

Expand Messages
  • 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 1 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 2 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 3 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 4 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 5 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 6 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 7 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 8 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.