Typekit

[Jeff Wheeler]

Embedded fonts, like those provided through this service, will change the internet in the next few years.

http://blog.typekit.com/

[Templarian]

In the next few years browsers will support. "@font-face". Safari and the next release of Firefox already support this.

I wouldn't doubt it if a few sites already had CSS3 web fonts in place for the browsers that support it.

Plus these embed font things have been done to death.

[shane-c]

This isn't just another "embed font thing"... Seems to be more of a solution to the legal side of it, which is really important.

But, as we all know, even though the latest versions of major browsers will soon support linked fonts, it's still going to be a long time before enough people are using such high versions that we won't need these already-existing work-arounds like sIFR and whatnot. On some of my sites' stats, 20% of the visitors are still using IE6 :( So stuff like this, while awesome and important, doesn't mean much to me in the near future, because I'm still going to have to use work-arounds anyway.

Now, if there was some tool/movement that would get people to update their browsers regularly, that would be something to get excited about...

[Jeff Wheeler]

It seems to me, anecdoctally, that users are upgrading at an accelerated pace. Just last week, a lot of big-whig web guys were talking about using special IE6 stylesheets that didn't present the site in the main design, but provided just enough to make the content readable in IE6.

In the next few years, I expect this to continue much faster.

@Temp: This uses the font-face rules, and provides those fonts legally.

[shane-c]

Even if more and more people are upgrading more frequently, you'd have to think that the number of people on browsers that support linked fonts (i.e. late 2009 browsers/versions, probably) wouldn't reach a reasonable-enough level to base your Web typography purely on that, for at least another 5 years or so.

[Jeff Wheeler]

I suppose it depends greatly on your audience. Tech websites are, of course, going to have users with more up-to-date browsers sooner. They're more likely to be interested in this, anyways.

And, most developers won't base their web typography exclusively on this, but rather use it as a really great progressive enhancement.

[shane-c]

True. No doubt it's an awesome step in the right direction. The pessimist side of me is just complaining that it's not really going to benefit me much any time in the near-ish future. :emo:

[Esherido]

It'll either be a massive success or just another blip on the radar. That's my :2c:.

[Templarian]

I just read it, yea the font-face stuff will catch on way before that even starts to be real.

[Esherido]

Well, @font-face is nice from the designer's point of view, but what about the legal field? Since it enables anyone to go and download all of the fonts on your website, it robs the font creators of revenue, and possibly dumps you in some hot water.

[boozy juice]

This issue mirrors the major music labels current dilemma on illegal downloads in many ways.

Typographers are unfortunately gonna lose out on making some money from their skill and craft, exactly the same way a small time music producer/band loses out for every track illegally downloaded. Typography must (and already is in the most part) become niche and personalised to the brief whilst adhering to other design based skills - we'll see more bespoke one-off typograms/logograms > full type sets for large corporations that use other design based skills - illustration being the obvious one. Similarly, music generates more income for bands that do live shows and tours than those that rely on actual record sales. Also, as young music producers/new bands currently do think, new typographers probably also must think that having their craft ripped for 'free' in this day and age is ok, since its recognition that counts whilst starting up.. looking up the ladder its the established people that will be hit more in the wallet - hence this movement.

Social conditioning teaches 'if you dont pay for something that you value, you should feel guilt'. But the internet has evolved this thought beyond that, as the next generation will see music as free, or at least readily available as the actual hard copy format dies (hot press, print, newspapers). Similar to someone growing up in the previous few decades saw the FM/AM radio as free access to music, or copying albums via cassette tapes. Unlike buying something from a shop, or even an online shop, if its virtual and copyable then its free to the next gen. Fonts will be viewed similarly.

We all know that humans are infinitely adaptive, creative and innovative in their approaches to problems - as man creates, another destroys, while another adapts. Therefore, I dont believe we have such a problem (yet) that is insurmountable. Most people will still pay for quality, sometimes regardless of uniqueness, exclusivity or originality (how many different jeans do you own? and how many other have and wear the same pair at the same time?).

Point is that this technology, and/or similar, wont stop people crafting new, and/or adapting old, pieces of art whether it has a price tag/copyright/license or not.

[ramie]

Did anyone actually read and digest that article?

The whole point of Typekit is that it deals with these licensing restrictions and allows @font-face to be used in a legal manner with 3rd party fonts - hence Jeff stating that it will change the web, as @font-face undoubtedly will, this will help that along the right path (Jeff Veen is a smart guy, this is not a fly-by-night project).

It is also not a JavaScript replacement technique or similar.

Aye, if anyone is interested @font-face has always worked in IE, it is Microsoft's proprietary font format (EOT) thats the issue, not the implementation of @font-face.

----------------

I'm surprised no one picked up on the remark about Progressive Enhancement technique. This is a sure fire way to get the best of both worlds, help push things forward and implement best practices without compromising integrity of the work and resolving to hacks (sifr and friends)...

I would argue for progressive enhancements any day of the week over a font-replacement technique, its just the correct way to go about it and in my view a more robust solution to offer a client (Generally we design the thing, we put the bloody fonts that need sifr etc in there in the first instance... why? (professional ego))

[Iamthejuggler]

It is also not a JavaScript replacement technique.

Yes it is. The whole idea sounds awful to me. Firstly you have to pay a monthly fee to use these fonts. That in itself is ok. Secondly, and most importantly, when someone visits your page it has to load a javascript that will then parse your entire html page, and all css, then donload the required fonts from this third party server (which you have to hope isn't down or under load) and then apply these fonts to the parsed html/css.

THEN it can properly render the page. And it will have to do this for every page .... There is no way that can be anything but painfully slow if you ask me.

[ramie]

No it is not, JS is used to authenticate, the rendering is done by @font-face.

[boozy juice]

Of course I digested it ramie.

iamthejugglers got the idea right, as its sort of reads less like like a javascript based 'access key/license' to (possibly a server based) repository of fonts to me also. The more money you pay (or its cost you for buying the font in the first place) the more fonts you'll have access to. In turn, money might get divided the same way the PRS/MCPS split money for music publishing. I dont believe it'll be that massively impacting on download speeds though - unless its your sole job to sacrifice the aesthetics for ultimate optimisation: data retrieval, database heavy work etc. not the latest corporate nike microsite. As it is, the technology is at best a year or two off, in which time line speeds will have got faster, exchanges will have further upgraded etc...

[ramie]

Regardless, it is still not a javascript replacement technique thats what I mean.

I care little for this argument - it's almost as bad as when people used to mix usability and accessibility up - and am really just saying...

Beer replacement technique is where it's at right now, it's actually sunny outside :D

[shane-c]

I also enjoy employing the Beer replacement technique. That is true progressive enhancement.

[Jeff Wheeler]

And, most developers won't base their web typography exclusively on this, but rather use it as a really great progressive enhancement.


I'm surprised no one picked up on the remark about Progressive Enhancement technique.

What?

[ramie]

^ Picked up on the remark made by you. :look:

[Jeff Wheeler]

Oh.