Hello, (long background, short question) I’ve been looking at the various parameters that are set in accordance with the document’s main font size. There are at least a dozen dimens and skips that are set along with the font size, though some classes (and the plain format) may leave some things unchanged. I realized that, instead of being set directly by the font size option, these parameters ought to be managed by templates that control specific document elements (e.g. \abovedisplayskip and friends should be managed by equation templates). However, there should be a way to conveniently set these parameters relative to the main font size. A final consideration is the fact that there may be cases where a designer would prefer to use exact values instead. This also applies to font sizes other than the main point size. It is quite natural to want to define \large as 1.2 times \normalsize. Defining font sizes and the several spacing and layout parameters in this relative manner means that arbitrary font sizes can be used with good results. It also eliminates the need for providing a bunch of .clo files for a finite set of font size options. In trying to allow both relative and exact definitions, I’m providing templates that take exact values, but I also provide the command \NormalPointSize, which returns the value of the main font size, and some commands for scaling a length by some factor. The scaling commands use floating-point arithmetic and round to some particular precision (e.g. hundredth, tenth, half, whole point). The rounding helps keep lengths and skips at “tidy” numbers, but more importantly will (hopefully) reduce the likelyhood of odd layout issues caused by uncontrolled roundoff error. My question: is this a good solution/compromise for the issues I described? It seems reasonable to me, but I fear I’m probably biased :-) Warmly, Kelly