Forum Moderators: open
Using WEFT the other day, I created a sample that appears to work just fine in IE6 and NN7 with the following code.
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE>Test Page</TITLE>
<STYLE TYPE="text/css">
@font-face {
font-family: creepy;
font-style: normal;
font-weight: normal;
src: url(CREEPY0.eot); }
-->
</STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<span style="font-family:creepy;font-size:72pt;color:Maroon;">a b c d e f g</span>
</BODY>
</HTML>
I guess I'm just looking for opinions on using this method at all and how compatible it is beyond IE and NN.
Thanks
I have a vague thought that honestly there shouldn't BE any copyright restrictions - f'rinstance, if you produce a company brochure with the fonts living on your machine, some of those fonts may be copyrighted, but I don't know that Nevada Power (as an example, and because I have their stockholders' annual meeting agenda handy) has a whole file folder of permissions from Bitstream et al for the use of their fonts in print media....
Anyway, that's my WAY more than 2 cents worth....
Edit: and I COULD have addressed the original question *sigh*....
My sites with embedded fonts display those fonts quite nicely in all browsers I have available (nothing for mac or linux, sorry). And this is NOT because they are "living on my machine" - I routinely test by uninstalling the relevant fonts. I've placed the eot info in my css stylesheets....
Wouldn't the use of IFR hold the same sort of copyright risk as eot regardless of format? Or is it the fact that the font information is not directly visible in the source of the page that makes it a better solution?
As for Weft (or any font embedding scheme), I was led to believe that copyright is NOT an issue at all with these technologies. That's the whole point: fonts are not installed on the remots system (at least, not working ones). You're not really distributing anything, and providing they are unhackable (7 years and counting!), nobody will be able to steal anything.
Bearing in mind the absolutely huge advantages to using text+fonts instead of graphics (both for the webmaster, for the server and also for the end reader), then yeah, they are well worth using.
As for Weft (or any font embedding scheme), I was led to believe that copyright is NOT an issue at all with these technologies. That's the whole point: fonts are not installed on the remots system (at least, not working ones). You're not really distributing anything, and providing they are unhackable (7 years and counting!), nobody will be able to steal anything.
Hmmm. That's a very interesting statement. I had contacted various font authors/hinters as listed in certain fonts I wanted to embed. The reason for contact was the "unembeddable" nature of those fonts. In EVERY CASE (I think probably 10-12 UNIQUE copyright-holders), I was told they had made the fonts "unusable" in WEFT simply due to copyright considerations - and several were so blunt as to say in effect that since they could not recoup any of their investment through "royalties" (even though I had paid for those fonts) they would forever refuse to allow their fonts to be embedded through ANY technology, not just WEFT.
Admittedly, this was all several years in the past. Perhaps I should revisit this whole thing.
And can you imagine somebody who makes a well-known font recieving 10,000 emails a day requesting permission? It can't work.
Besides, look at it this way: some readers might like the font so much they go out and buy it (so they can use it themselves). So perhaps the webmaster should charge the foundry so that they don't get a free advert?!
