It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.
Dave Crossland said:
https://2021.stateofcss.com/en-US/features/typography/#variable_fonts20% of surveyed CSS developers said they've used VFs40% heard of it but not yet used it40% never heard of it
John Hudson said:
Twenty-plus years on from OpenType, it is still possible to talk to graduates of typography classes in design schools and find that they have zero knowledge of OpenType Layout, so it wouldn’t surprise me to find that teaching of web typography is stuck at @font-face static fonts.
Andreas Stötzner said:
I’d rather think about to reform our means of character input. That seems to me a much bigger problem of today’s typographic practice in a globalized world, that is the Achilles’ heel no one seems to touch so far.But that is, admittedly, another thread.
Peter Constable said:
… text prediction is just one example of major innovation …
Igor Petrovic said:But variable font, let's say it's TTF is used as it is on the web (not converted or exported as .woff or .woff2)?
Matthew Smith said:
If you are exporting your variable fonts as TTFs, I would recommend then converting them to woff or woff2 (both for added compression and to slightly deter direct downloads).Some type design software (like Glyphs) only has a TTF (quadratic) export option for variable fonts at the moment, so you need to do the woff/woff2 conversion “manually” (with a command line tool for example).
Igor Petrovic said:
Thanks Erwin. If I get it right, classic (static) OTF is for desktop, and it has a corresponding web format (.woff or .woff2) to make it usable on the web.But variable font, let's say it's TTF is used as it is on the web (not converted or exported as .woff or .woff2)?