Comments on: Efficiently Serving Custom Web Fonts http://weston.ruter.net/2008/08/27/efficiently-serving-custom-web-fonts/ Web application developer in Portland, Oregon Mon, 22 Feb 2010 20:34:18 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: Weston Ruter http://weston.ruter.net/2008/08/27/efficiently-serving-custom-web-fonts/comment-page-1/#comment-8097 Weston Ruter Mon, 17 Aug 2009 13:52:35 +0000 http://weston.ruter.net/?p=42#comment-8097 @anonymous: Some browsers (IE, if I remember right) don't recognize the <code>local()</code> value for the <code>src</code> property. Those browsers would ignore that entire property declaration, and this is why there is a second property defined directly before: unsupporting browsers ignore the second property, and supporting browsers override the first with the second. @anonymous:
Some browsers (IE, if I remember right) don’t recognize the local() value for the src property. Those browsers would ignore that entire property declaration, and this is why there is a second property defined directly before: unsupporting browsers ignore the second property, and supporting browsers override the first with the second.

]]> By: anonymous http://weston.ruter.net/2008/08/27/efficiently-serving-custom-web-fonts/comment-page-1/#comment-8096 anonymous Mon, 17 Aug 2009 13:22:59 +0000 http://weston.ruter.net/?p=42#comment-8096 src: url("/fonts/foobarbaz.font"); src: local("FooBarBaz"), url("/fonts/foobarbaz.font"); is that really necessary? surely the 2nd line alone is sufficient? what am i missing? src: url(“/fonts/foobarbaz.font”);
src: local(“FooBarBaz”), url(“/fonts/foobarbaz.font”);

is that really necessary? surely the 2nd line alone is sufficient? what am i missing?

]]> By: Weston Ruter http://weston.ruter.net/2008/08/27/efficiently-serving-custom-web-fonts/comment-page-1/#comment-945 Weston Ruter Wed, 27 Aug 2008 23:22:08 +0000 http://weston.ruter.net/?p=42#comment-945 @Brad: Note the additional “<code>--></code>” after the opening of the non-IE conditional comment and the “<code><!--</code>” before the closing: these ensure that non-IE browsers do see the contents of the conditional comment while at the same time it remains invisible to IE. @Brad:
Note the additional “-->” after the opening of the non-IE conditional comment and the “<!--” before the closing: these ensure that non-IE browsers do see the contents of the conditional comment while at the same time it remains invisible to IE.

]]> By: Brad Neuberg http://weston.ruter.net/2008/08/27/efficiently-serving-custom-web-fonts/comment-page-1/#comment-943 Brad Neuberg Wed, 27 Aug 2008 23:03:40 +0000 http://weston.ruter.net/?p=42#comment-943 This looks interesting. However, you have a conditional comment for !IE; only IE supports these, so other browsers wouldn't see the negative condition. This looks interesting. However, you have a conditional comment for !IE; only IE supports these, so other browsers wouldn’t see the negative condition.

]]> By: Ben Galbraith http://weston.ruter.net/2008/08/27/efficiently-serving-custom-web-fonts/comment-page-1/#comment-942 Ben Galbraith Wed, 27 Aug 2008 22:59:02 +0000 http://weston.ruter.net/?p=42#comment-942 Hi Weston, Interesting post. Quick clarification: as indicated in the story, the font idea is John Allsopp's, not mine. :-) Hi Weston,

Interesting post. Quick clarification: as indicated in the story, the font idea is John Allsopp’s, not mine. :-)

]]>