Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Roel Nieskens

About

Username
Roel Nieskens
Joined
Visits
615
Last Active
Roles
Member
Points
80
Posts
72
  • Re: Web Font Security

    Serving your webfonts only in the WOFF and WOFF2 formats is maybe your best bet. As with all other options, people who know their stuff will be able to pirate them anyway, but the Average Joe won't be able to simply download and install them.
  • Re: WOFF support in different browsers

    Unfortunately we can never be sure. It's very well possible to have an old Android 2.2 phone connected to a hyperfast 54 Mbps wifi network, or the latest high-end Macbook to a super unstable GPRS network. Web developers have been dreaming of a media query or API that would just answer the simple question "are we on a slow or fast connection?"

    So we have to make assumptions. Serving heavily optimised fonts to modern browsers who can handle them, and no fonts to obsolete browsers, is a very good start.

    Dealing with FOUT and FOIT by having a good @font-face loading strategy is a much larger problem to be solved and not many web developers are doing that. They still believe including legacy formats in the old "bulletproof @font-face syntax" (published in 2009, when webfonts were still in their infancy!) is enough for an accessible, usable site. I think that's where the request of EOT, OTF/TTF and SVG versions comes from — because of outdated info, not because of a thorough research of the target audience and their needs.
  • Re: WOFF support in different browsers

    If you click the "Show all" button it'll show you older versions of browsers, and you'll see for instance that IE8 and older Android don't support WOFF. It'd be up to you to decide if you want to offer no custom fonts to those visitors, of offer EOT (for old IE) or TTF/OTF (for old Android).
  • Re: Why these multi-color fonts are upside down in Photoshop CC 2017?

    Just to be clear, Photoshop is working correctly — it dutifully ignores the invalid transform.

    This should definitely be fixed in the tools that produce these fonts.
  • Re: Webfont formats for self hosting

    That sounds a bit like "some might not want to use our weight mappings, so no-one gets to use weight mappings." ;) But that means that instead of using the web's natural method to define and use weights through the font-weight property, you completely disable this option for developers. The alternative is then to misuse font families to differentiate between weights. Instead of:
    h1 {
      font-family: MyFont;
      font-weight: bold;
    }
    p {
      font-family: MyFont;
      font-weight: normal;
    }
    
    You are forced to do:

    h1 {
      font-family: MyFontBold;
      font-weight: normal;
    }
    p {
      font-family: MyFontNormal;
      font-weight: normal;
    }
    I would personally count that as a serious strike against using such a service. It doesn't match with best practices and you'd need to refactor your CSS to use families instead of weights. If that's even possible — lots of CMSes, plugins and libraries can't easily be hacked to do so. That may be something to keep in mind.