Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: TECH: Font Embedding

Expand Messages
  • Lars Mathiesen
    2008/12/3 David J. Peterson ... The font designer doesn t have to do anything. The web page designer has to use the product, and the
    Message 1 of 9 , Dec 3, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      2008/12/3 David J. Peterson <dedalvs@...>
      > I'm not sure I understand this new product correctly, but
      > will this "fix" the whole display problem on the web if the
      > font creator buys the product, or does the user have to buy
      > it too?

      > http://www.fontlab.com/photofont/webready

      The font designer doesn't have to do anything. The web page designer
      has to use the product, and the browser has to have Flash installed
      and Javascript enabled. The latter fits about 99.5% of the general
      public, but in an audience of nerds and grumps like this, the number
      will be lower.

      The demo on the page uses absolute sizes (in px) for the object, which
      means that the letters stay the same size when the page is resized (in
      IE and FF at least). Might be better if they'd use em sizing.

      --
      Lars
    • Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets
      ... This is a server-side technology. So the user doesn t need to buy anything. As far as I see it, the technology uses Flash and Javascript to replace on the
      Message 2 of 9 , Dec 5, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        ----- "David J. Peterson" <dedalvs@...> a écrit :

        > I'm not sure I understand this new product correctly, but
        > will this "fix" the whole display problem on the web if the
        > font creator buys the product, or does the user have to buy
        > it too?
        >
        > http://www.fontlab.com/photofont/webready
        >

        This is a server-side technology. So the user doesn't need to buy anything.

        As far as I see it, the technology uses Flash and Javascript to replace on the fly specific HTML entities with Flash applets, so the user needs Flash installed and Javascript on in order to enjoy the effect. It seems to have quite a few advantages:
        - the original page source doesn't contain any weird mark-up, so it is fully searchable, crawlable, and can be standards-compliant.
        - it degrades gracefully: if the user has disabled Javascript or doesn't have Flash, the text is just shown as specified by the original mark-up, so you don't get to enjoy a beautiful font, but the text is still appearing correctly, as it appeared in the page HTML source.
        - it supports copy&paste.
        But there are also a few disadvantages:
        - it doesn't seem to handle zooming very well (the text stays in a single size, even when using this "web outline font" thing).
        - if your goal was to show a text in a conscript, users with Javascript disabled and/or no Flash plugin (anyone checking your page on an iPhone, for instance) will just see gibberish.
        - it is extremely slow (as it needs to replace pieces of text on the fly with Flash applets) and thus is only viable for headings or very short pieces of text.

        But until CSS3 web fonts become supported by the main browsers, it seems to be the only solution worth using. It does beat using pictures, although it still feels like a crutch rather than a real solution to the problem.
        --
        Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets.

        http://christophoronomicon.blogspot.com
        http://www.christophoronomicon.nl

        It takes a straight mind to create a twisted conlang.
      • David J. Peterson
        Ah! That s a very nice summary, and I think decides the issue for me. Thanks very much, Christophe! -David
        Message 3 of 9 , Dec 5, 2008
        • 0 Attachment
          Ah! That's a very nice summary, and I think decides the issue
          for me. Thanks very much, Christophe!

          -David
          *******************************************************************
          "A male love inevivi i'ala'i oku i ue pokulu'ume o heki a."
          "No eternal reward will forgive us now for wasting the dawn."

          -Jim Morrison

          http://dedalvs.free.fr/

          On Dec 5, 2008, at 6∞06 AM, Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets wrote:

          > ----- "David J. Peterson" <dedalvs@...> a écrit :
          >
          >> I'm not sure I understand this new product correctly, but
          >> will this "fix" the whole display problem on the web if the
          >> font creator buys the product, or does the user have to buy
          >> it too?
          >>
          >> http://www.fontlab.com/photofont/webready
          >>
          >
          > This is a server-side technology. So the user doesn't need to buy
          > anything.
          >
          > As far as I see it, the technology uses Flash and Javascript to
          > replace on the fly specific HTML entities with Flash applets, so
          > the user needs Flash installed and Javascript on in order to enjoy
          > the effect. It seems to have quite a few advantages:
          > - the original page source doesn't contain any weird mark-up, so it
          > is fully searchable, crawlable, and can be standards-compliant.
          > - it degrades gracefully: if the user has disabled Javascript or
          > doesn't have Flash, the text is just shown as specified by the
          > original mark-up, so you don't get to enjoy a beautiful font, but
          > the text is still appearing correctly, as it appeared in the page
          > HTML source.
          > - it supports copy&paste.
          > But there are also a few disadvantages:
          > - it doesn't seem to handle zooming very well (the text stays in a
          > single size, even when using this "web outline font" thing).
          > - if your goal was to show a text in a conscript, users with
          > Javascript disabled and/or no Flash plugin (anyone checking your
          > page on an iPhone, for instance) will just see gibberish.
          > - it is extremely slow (as it needs to replace pieces of text on
          > the fly with Flash applets) and thus is only viable for headings or
          > very short pieces of text.
          >
          > But until CSS3 web fonts become supported by the main browsers, it
          > seems to be the only solution worth using. It does beat using
          > pictures, although it still feels like a crutch rather than a real
          > solution to the problem.
          > --
          > Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets.
          >
          > http://christophoronomicon.blogspot.com
          > http://www.christophoronomicon.nl
          >
          > It takes a straight mind to create a twisted conlang.
        • Mark J. Reed
          On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 9:06 AM, Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets
          Message 4 of 9 , Dec 7, 2008
          • 0 Attachment
            On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 9:06 AM, Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets <
            christophe.grandsire@...> wrote:

            > This is a server-side technology. So the user doesn't need to buy anything.


            The licensed software may only have to be installed on the server side, but
            it's a bit misleading to call it a "server-side technology" when the actual
            font replacement happens inside the user's browser and requires Flash and
            Javascript.

            I agree that it's interesting. Sort of a dancing-bear approach...

            --
            Mark J. Reed <markjreed@...>
          • Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets
            ... True, it s a bit misleading. It was just a sort of shortcut for the user doesn t have to download any specific plugin . ... So far it s the best solution
            Message 5 of 9 , Dec 8, 2008
            • 0 Attachment
              ----- "Mark J. Reed" <markjreed@...> a écrit :

              > On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 9:06 AM, Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets <
              > christophe.grandsire@...> wrote:
              >
              > > This is a server-side technology. So the user doesn't need to buy
              > anything.
              >
              >
              > The licensed software may only have to be installed on the server
              > side, but
              > it's a bit misleading to call it a "server-side technology" when the
              > actual
              > font replacement happens inside the user's browser and requires Flash
              > and
              > Javascript.
              >

              True, it's a bit misleading. It was just a sort of shortcut for "the user doesn't have to download any specific plugin".

              > I agree that it's interesting. Sort of a dancing-bear approach...
              >

              So far it's the best solution I've seen for browsers that don't support CSS3 web fonts. But it's still just a crutch.
              --
              Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets.

              http://christophoronomicon.blogspot.com
              http://www.christophoronomicon.nl

              It takes a straight mind to create a twisted conlang.
            • Rik Roots
              ... My lord - I ve just discovered that Safari (on Windows) supports the @font-face CSS declarations - and Firefox are supposed to be supporting them in v3.1?
              Message 6 of 9 , Dec 8, 2008
              • 0 Attachment
                Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets wrote:
                > <snip>
                > So far it's the best solution I've seen for browsers that don't support CSS3 web fonts. But it's still just a crutch.
                >

                My lord - I've just discovered that Safari (on Windows) supports the
                @font-face CSS declarations - and Firefox are supposed to be supporting
                them in v3.1? Knock me down with a feather! Which just leaves IE, which
                only does the trick for .eot fonts (which have been proposed as an open
                Web standard, whatever that means).

                Still, that's major progress, but not enough yet to let me abandon using
                images for examples of my conscripts on my website ...

                Rik
              • David J. Peterson
                Rik wrote:
                Message 7 of 9 , Dec 8, 2008
                • 0 Attachment
                  Rik wrote:
                  <<
                  My lord - I've just discovered that Safari (on Windows) supports the
                  @font-face CSS declarations - and Firefox are supposed to be
                  supporting them in v3.1? Knock me down with a feather! Which just
                  leaves IE, which only does the trick for .eot fonts (which have been
                  proposed as an open Web standard, whatever that means).
                  >>

                  It drives me nuts that we have to create websites as if we were
                  designing them solely for the worst browser out there, and that
                  that browser is always IE, and that IE is THE most popular
                  browser on the planet. Argh!

                  -David
                  *******************************************************************
                  "A male love inevivi i'ala'i oku i ue pokulu'ume o heki a."
                  "No eternal reward will forgive us now for wasting the dawn."

                  -Jim Morrison

                  http://dedalvs.free.fr/
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.