re: (See: for example, the sneering aside the author makes about typographic leading) That sneering aside illustrates precisely one of my pet peeves. Namely, t

re: (See: for example, the sneering aside the author makes about typographic leading) That sneering aside illustrates precisely one of my pet peeves. Namely, that the current tools for web typography embody a tremendous leap backwards in ease of use, compared to print design tools. In the print world, it's quite easy to create variations in leading. Contrary to the author's assertion, leading matters a great deal. The current requirements that one write code to achieve sophisticated typography remind me of the terminal-based typesetting machines that were common up until the early 1990s. You entered your text on a green-screen monitor, added codes for size, italics, bold, and so forth, and it came out of a Linotronic machine on photographic paper. After being developed, the paper was pasted into the layout. Hopefully the state of the art in web typography will one day advance beyond technology that was obsolete in the print world some twenty years ago.