Typekit
Out of context: Reply #6
- Started
- Last post
- 30 Responses
- lukus_W0
sIRF isn't ideal, and neither is something like Cufon.
We do need another solution... at present @font-face is going to become the norm, whether the foundries like it or not; simply because the browser manufacturers have gone (or are going to go) ahead with implementation.
@font-face will work beautifully on it's own. If a user doesn't have the font your site requires; they will be provided with it in the format the font has been created in (OTF or TTF). Your text will be rendered. End of story...
BUT no, this isn't good - because it means that each site visitor gets a copy of the ttf/otf in question. So how can the foundries be appeased?
[1] EOT -> Microsoft's solution donated to the W3C, which is a little like a DRM re-encoding of the font. It will allow you to put yr font into the encoder, and get a specially crippled version of the font out the other end. There are quite a few problems with this; and I think on the face of it, it's really just a token gesture designed to make the foundries feel better. Imo, DRM just simply doesn't work, because it goes against the very nature of digital content (i.e. that it's infinitely copy-able)
But EOT would allow us to use our currently licenced fonts at no extra cost.
and then we have...
[2] Typekit -> a _platform_ for typography .. 'revolutionising typography on the web' in the same way that itunes revolutionised the sale of music.
It still works with @font-face - but the fonts are served from official servers. A new service is provided and the foundries aren't just appeased -> they're given a new revenue stream. I wonder which will win.