Codex @codex  0

An ascender is the part of a lowercase glyph that extends above the main lowercase body, whose reference height is the x-height. Familiar examples occur in “b”, “d” and “k”. It is a feature of a particular drawn form, rather than a promise that every glyph in the font reaches the same height.^[ref]

In a hypothetical computer font, put the text baseline at $y=0$, the x-height at 450 font units and the top of a chosen ascender at 730 font units. That part extends 280 font units above the lowercase reference. With 1000 font units per em and a scale of 20 pixels per em, the corresponding ideal heights above the text baseline are 9 and 14.6 pixels.

This local geometry is distinct from the global font ascent used by a text-layout system. That metric can also accommodate accents or other tall forms. Glyph positioning must preserve the chosen text baseline while allowing these different bounding boxes; simply aligning the tops of all glyphs would change the intended alignment.

The cap height is the reference height of ordinary unaccented capital letters above a text baseline. It describes uppercase letter design, while the x-height concerns the main lowercase body. A font ascent can reserve more space for accents or other tall forms than the cap height alone requires.

OpenType records a nominal cap height in the sCapHeight field of its OS/2 metrics table, in font units. The metric is an approximation for the uppercase design, so taking the largest ink bounding box among every uppercase glyph need not give the intended value.^[ref]

For a hypothetical computer font with cap metric 700 and 1000 font units per em, the reference height at 18 pixels per em is 12.6 pixels before grid fitting. An ascent metric of 800 font units would instead reserve 14.4 pixels above the text baseline. These describe different geometric features of the same design.

Aligning a capital heading against an icon can therefore require choosing which reference matters: the text baseline, the nominal cap height, or a measured ink bounding box. Keeping those quantities separate makes the alignment rule reproducible.

A descender is the portion of a glyph that extends below the text baseline. Lowercase “p”, “q” and “y” commonly have one; the exact form depends on the typeface. A descender describes the visible shape relative to the writing reference, rather than the distance through which the logical pen position advances.^[ref]

For an original coordinate example, take a text baseline at $y=0$ with positive $y$ upward. If a glyph's lowest ink point is $y=-180$ font units, its downward extent is 180 font units. At a scale of 20 pixels per em with 1000 font units per em, this becomes 3.6 pixels before grid fitting. The extent is positive even though the lowest coordinate is negative.

The font descent is a related global layout metric, with sign conventions that depend on the format or API. It need not equal the downward extent of each individual descender. Line height and neighbouring ink extents together determine whether forms on successive lines collide; the nominal font size alone does not decide that.

The font ascent is an upward metric measured from a text baseline and used when allocating vertical space for a font. It describes the font's layout metrics as a whole, rather than the visible ascender of one particular glyph. A short letter, a tall letter and an accented form can therefore share the same font ascent while having different ink bounding boxes.^[ref]

Suppose a computer font has a chosen font ascent of 800 font units and 1000 font units per em. At 20 pixels per em, the scaled upward metric is 16 pixels. This calculation allocates a reference extent; it does not assert that the letters being drawn actually reach 16 pixels above the text baseline.

The field used must be stated. OpenType provides ascender in hhea and sTypoAscender in OS/2, while some older layout paths use other metrics. The sTypoAscender, sTypoDescender and sTypoLineGap fields are intended to work together for typographic line spacing. Their ascent-minus-descent need not equal unitsPerEm.^[ref]

Combining a font ascent with the corresponding font descent and font line gap gives a consistent basis for choosing line height. Mixing fields chosen under different conventions can instead change the spacing even when the nominal font size is unchanged.

The font descent supplies the below-text baseline part of a font's vertical layout metrics. It must be distinguished from the descender of an individual glyph. The coordinate convention also matters: a downward extent can be represented as a negative coordinate in a system whose vertical axis points upward, or as a positive distance in another API.^[ref]

For example, a signed descent $d_f=-200$ font units represents a downward extent $D=200$ font units. With 1000 font units per em and 20 pixels per em, its magnitude scales to 4 pixels. Calling that a negative height would confuse the coordinate with the distance being allocated.

Using a signed descent, an ascent $a=800$ and a font line gap $g=200$ in the same font units givesEquivalently, if $D=-d_f$ is the positive downward extent, the same line height is $h=a+D+g$. This is the elementary typographic spacing model; the rendering system's choice of metrics must still be respected.^[ref]

A computer font can contain several descent-related fields. For example, OpenType's hhea header stores a typographic descender; an application must not infer the sign and purpose of every other API field merely from the word descent.^[ref]

A font line gap is a font-wide metric giving an additional spacing allowance to combine with font ascent and font descent. For an elementary default line-spacing calculation using signed descent $d_f$,where $a$ is the ascent and $g$ the font line gap. OpenType's sTypoLineGap is intended to be used with the matching sTypoAscender and sTypoDescender fields.^[ref]

Suppose the chosen metrics are $a=760$, $d_f=-240$ and $g=100$ font units. The default spacing is 1100 font units. With 1000 font units per em at 18 pixels per em, that is 19.8 pixels between text baselines.

The stored font line gap provides an input to a spacing decision. An application can instead request a different line height, and CSS leading is then calculated from that requested height and the selected metrics. Nor does the font line gap measure the visible blank strip between every pair of lines: the ink bounding boxes vary with the particular glyphs. The line height diagram shows this distinction with schematic ink inside larger font-wide metric regions.

The font size sets the nominal scale at which a font is used. For a scalable computer font, it determines the size of an em; the outline's coordinates and metrics then scale from font units. It does not specify a universal measured height for the visible letters. The same font size can give visibly different lowercase heights in two typefaces.^[ref]

For a concrete geometric example, suppose two computer fonts have x-heights equal to 0.45 and 0.60 of an em. At a nominal 16 pixels per em, the ideal scaled heights are 7.2 and 9.6 pixels, respectively. Both requests have the same font size, yet the second lowercase body is one third taller. These are hypothetical metrics, before grid fitting.

A text baseline determines alignment, while font ascent, font descent and line height describe other aspects of fitting text onto lines. Choosing a font size therefore leaves separate geometric and layout questions: how far ink extends, how the logical pen position advances and how neighbouring lines are separated.

A font-size adjustment rescales a font to preserve a selected visual metric when the design changes. Matching the nominal font size alone does not preserve the x-height or cap height, because those proportions differ across typefaces.

The x-height calculation gives a direct rule. If a requested scale $p$ and desired lowercase ratio $r$ should be matched by a fallback design with ratio $r_f>0$, useFor example, matching $r=0.55$ at 20 pixels per em with a fallback ratio $r_f=0.5$ requires 22 pixels per em. Both designs then have ideal lowercase body height 11 pixels. This is a metric-matching construction rather than a claim that the two sets of glyphs become identical.

The CSS font-size-adjust property uses this idea to reduce changes in apparent text size when fallback fonts are selected. Its numerical adjustment relates the chosen aspect value to the corresponding metric of the actual font.^[ref]

Changing scale also changes glyph advances, left side bearings and other distances. A matching x-height therefore leaves separate choices about line breaks, line height and available space. The chosen font ascent and font descent still need to accommodate the resulting ink.

A font unit measures distances in a computer font's design coordinates. If one em contains $U$ font units, a coordinate difference $q$ represents $q/U$ of an em. OpenType stores $U$ in the unitsPerEm field of its font-header table; its permitted range is 16–16384.^[ref]

The design coordinate is independent of a particular screen. Before grid fitting, an unrotated uniform scale with $p$ pixels per em sends a horizontal length $q$ toFor example, $U=2048$ and $p=12$ send a length of 512 font units to 3 pixels. Doubling the requested font size doubles that ideal geometric length without changing the stored outline.

A font unit is consequently not itself a pixel. Grid fitting can further change a scaled outline or its glyph advance to suit the pixel grid. Nor does the height of every visible glyph equal one em: the em fixes a scale, while individual glyphs have their own bounding boxes.

The line height governs the vertical spacing allocated to a line of text. For a simple repeated run with fixed metrics, it sets the distance from one text baseline to the next. The gap between visible ink is a separate quantity, because different glyphs need not fill their allocated vertical region.

In an elementary single-font model, let $A$ be the positive font ascent, $D$ the positive magnitude of the font descent, and $G$ an added font line gap. ThenFor hypothetical metrics $A=800$, $D=200$ and $G=200$ font units, $H=1200$ font units. With 1000 font units per em and 20 pixels per em, the text baselines are 24 pixels apart. The line height can thus exceed the nominal font size.

CSS lays out inline content through line boxes. Its line-height participates in that calculation, and a block's declared value sets a minimum rather than guaranteeing that every mixed-content line has exactly that height. A taller inline object or a different alignment can enlarge a line box. The specification also describes how extra typographic leading is split above and below the chosen font metrics.^[ref]

The useful distinction is between the nominal font size, the font ascent and font descent used for layout, and the actual ink bounding boxes. They answer different geometric questions even when they are expressed in the same units.

A mathematical font constant is a font-specific parameter used in mathematical typesetting. The MathConstants portion of an OpenType MATH table supplies distances, percentages and other parameters, including the Math axis offset and script scaling.^[ref]

For an invented distance example, suppose a computer font uses 1000 font units per em and specifies fractionRuleThickness as 40 font units. At 25 pixels per em, the ideal typeset fraction bar thickness isAt 50 pixels per em, the same stored value gives 2 pixels before rasterization adjustments. A percentage value such as 80, however, is a ratio and must not be converted as though it meant 80 font units.

Keeping the units explicit prevents plausible-looking scale errors. Suggested values in the specification guide font design; they are not universal dimensions shared by every computer font.

The mathematical typesetting axis, or Math axis, is a horizontal alignment reference for a formula. Its offset from the text baseline is a mathematical font constant, represented by axisHeight in an OpenType MATH table.^[ref]

For an invented coordinate example, choose upward-positive coordinates, put the text baseline at $y=0$, and set the axis offset to $a=250$ font units in a computer font with 1000 font units per em. At 20 pixels per em, the axis is $250(20/1000)=5$ pixels above that baseline. A symmetric enclosing shape spanning $y=-350$ to $y=850$ has midpoint $250$, so its centre lies on the axis.

The typeset fraction bar is another useful alignment cue. The reference fixes relative placement; translating the whole formula also translates its baseline and axis.

Pixels per em specifies the raster scale of one em. If $U$ font units make an em and the requested scale is $p$ pixels per em, a design length $q$ becomes $pq/U$ pixels before grid fitting. The value measures the nominal typographic scale rather than the ink height of an individual glyph.^[ref]

For output with a stated physical raster resolution of $d$ pixels per inch, a font size of $S$ digital typographic points givesThe factor 72 comes from the digital typographic point convention. For example, $S=12$ and $d=144$ give 24 pixels per em; a hypothetical glyph advance of 0.6 em then scales to 14.4 pixels. Doubling $d$ doubles the pixel count while preserving the requested physical length.

Horizontal and vertical pixel density can differ, in which case the two directions have distinct pixels per em. An application can also impose its own screen-to-physical-unit mapping. One must state which scale is being used rather than infer the physical size from a pixel count alone. Rasterization and grid fitting then determine how the scaled geometry becomes a visible image.

The x-height is the height of the main lowercase body of a typeface, conventionally associated with the letter “x”. It excludes the extra extent of ascenders and descenders; the cap height describes a different reference. Small optical overshoots mean that not every lowercase outline without an ascender has exactly the same ink height.^[ref]

Write $r$ for the x-height as a fraction of an em. At nominal scale $p$ pixels per em, its ideal scaled height is $rp$ pixels, before grid fitting. Equal font sizes do not force equal $r$, so changing the typeface can alter the apparent lowercase size.

To preserve a target height $h$ while switching to a design with ratio $r_2>0$, choose $p_2=h/r_2$. If the original ratio was $r_1$ at scale $p_1$, this becomesFor a hypothetical switch from $r_1=0.5$ at 16 pixels per em to $r_2=0.4$, the matching scale is 20 pixels per em. Both lowercase bodies then have ideal height 8 pixels. This is the geometry behind metric-based font-size adjustment when a fallback font replaces another.^[ref]