> HTML & CSS are not really suitable for "pixel perfect" text. ...and a lot of people don't care. > You'd have to disable the browser's word wrapping & come u

> HTML & CSS are not really suitable for "pixel perfect" text. ...and a lot of people don't care. > You'd have to disable the browser's word wrapping & come up with your own logic for where to insert <br /> tags ...unless you don't care. > even then you have issues like browsers "BrowserS"? Plural? No. This is one implementation - headless Chrome. Which you could use to do your own rendering. There's no plural. You would use one browser to do your headless rendering. > You'd have to essentially render text to an image server-side That is. What this is. > then scale the resulting image in the browser What? It depends entirely on what your use case is. If you want to email a PDF, then you could use headless Chrome to turn HTML into a PDF, and then email it. > So headless browsers are not suitable for rasterizing documents that contain text I feel like you're off in this weird space, very different from what I've experienced. And I've experienced it again, and again, at different companies. > Converting HTML to PNG/PDF is like comparing apples & oranges. The conversion will be imperfect. ...but potentially faster, lower effort, and "good enough" for many use cases.