Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 18.104.22.168
Forum Moderators: incrediBILL
I have jst re designed a website for my band and i was wondering if u guys could help me...
There is a font that i use for the links that I want other users to see... but it seems that the other users have to have that font on their computer to be able to see it... Is there any way around this..
I am new to this sorta stuff, so i would appreciate it very much if sum 1 could give me an explanation that's easy to follow coz i aint that bright lol
<Sorry, no URLs. See TOS [webmasterworld.com]>
u can see that i want the link to be in a dofferent font.
[edited by: tedster at 2:30 am (utc) on Feb. 21, 2004]
I use it occasionally. Otherwise, when it's a titling situation, I just make compressed graphics on transparent background with the appro font. If you don't use HUGE titles in MASSIVE sizes, this approach doesn't add a lot of overhead....
Using a CSS image replacement technique is probably the way you want to go.
The Paris newspaper, Le Monde, went on for decades using their specific fonts. Then, in the early 1990's when they decided to change their look, the font designers took months - even years - to create their entries into the contest. I think the winner of the cometition was paid six figures. You can bet the newspaper plans to stick with those fonts for quite a while!
Learning a bit about the centuries old discipline of typesetting can do wonders for our web pages. What I learned about fonts doing print advertising spurred me on to learn the things CSS enables. You can do wonders with even ONE basic font.
You can do wonders with even ONE basic font.
Though I must say this is a typical problem of people starting out with web design.
PS: I wouldn't mind a 'supported by all browsers' way of embedding fonts though.
Imo the copyright issue is moot as embedding already is a reality, it's just not standardized.
What exactly do you mean? You can make it italic, bold, give it a color but uhm, wonders?
By accepting a limitation like only one font, you focus on delivering the basic content, rather than on decoration. A web page is a communication, it's information. All the frills can (and often do) get in the way.
There's a school of music called minimalism -- Glass, Reich, Riley -- that has created extreme beauty within very strict limitation. All communication is art, and it thrives in the tension between freedom and limits, not in the expression of "no limit, no rules".
So what do I mean by wonders with a single font? Well, in addition to your list, you've also got these tools: line-height, letter-spacing, margins, padding, backgrounds, sizing, alignment, and small caps. Future browsers should also support degrees of bold, bolder, boldest.
That's a lot of tools for the tool kit. If someone has trouble getting their communication across with that many tools, then an extra font or two probably won't make the difference. Many entire books are printed with one font.
However, as pointed out, there are nasty copyright issues and I'm not even sure if any major browsers support this rule.
gif and png8 are not lossless compressions
They are definitely both lossless.
The only difference is that GIF only has a 256 color palette so it loses some colour information from hi-colour images.
"Gif format, unlike Jpeg format, use a lossless compression algorithm."
"PNG's compression is fully lossless"
What I don't understand is why IE doesn't support PNG alpha transparency. There are open source library implementations out there (such as libpng) so it wouldn't take any real work on their behalf.
And it has been an issue for a looong time now.
Which would obviate one of my main complaints about WEFT, and is the primary reason I don't use it much any more: the applet, while not "broken" per se, never seems to work exactly as one would wish, AND the eot files produced while supposedly "compressed" add an INCREDIBLE amount of overhead to page load times on dial-up (probably not on broadband, but I don't get to test on broadband - I occasionally sneak time on the T-1 at work, but it's not really a good idea *sigh*).
So here's a thought: why not simply use copyright-free or "public-domain" fonts (assuming there are some - seems like even some of the fancy stuff I use occasionally came with readme files stating they were public-domain.... I'll have to go check more carefully), loading the requisite fonts to one's own webspace?
This begs the question of browsers which don't allow or don't "see" the "@font-face" declaration, obviously. Not sure what could be done about that aside from simply detailed specification of "garden-variety" generic font families as backup....
I'm not meaning any denigration by "garden-variety" either btw - I don't use fancy fonts for much myself (the occasional title on a page which has a reason for it - like the luthier whose logo was an uncial decorative so the section titles made sense done similarly - and which I did in graphics because it was the only logical option 5 years ago....)