3 ms·
I wonder if a single fraction would have better kerning than could be achieved with the slash and super/subscripts.
by bmh_ca 10y ago
I wonder if a single fraction would have better kerning than could be achieved with the slash and super/subscripts.
- extra88 10y agoI'm not a typography nerd and I'm sure the Unicode fractions are typically tighter but it looks okay to me. http://output.jsbin.com/veqakaj http://output.jsbin.com/veqakaj
- ramshorns 10y agoThere are a few ways to do it, including Unicode superscript and subscript characters rather than formatting. These ones all look a bit different in my browser: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unicode_subscripts_and_superscripts#Uses https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unicode_subscripts_and_supersc...
- extra88 10y agoThey sure do, I added the Unicode superscript and subscript variant to that bin page, it's much more compact than the HTML element super and subscripts. I wonder what screenreader support is like for the Unicode vulgar fractions, the HTML, and the all-Unicode variants. Apple's VoiceOver correctly reads the Unicode 'fraction slash' and superscript and subscript numbers. Now that I'm thinking about it, using superscript and subscript with fraction slash visually displays a fraction as we expect but is not semantically correct; unmodified ASCII numbers separated by 'fraction slash' would more accurately represent the numerators and denominators.