the load time
isn't bad compared to using images for all your headers, and it's
probably way better than using other techniques that involve
generating SWFs or generating images on-the-fly for dynamic text
yes - did you take a look at the links Shanna sent? The load times are
really not bad a
On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 2:47 PM, Sandy wrote:
>
>> That being said, if one font looks blocky on someone's
>> windows 95 box with IE 6, then all fonts look blocky, so they wouldn't
>> know the difference.
>>
> good point Christian. So - worth using? Do the load times have you sitting
> there drummi
I only use it on H tags because of the load time. Removing unused
options like bold and italic helps, too. I have no patience for slow
computers, plus page speed is a ranking factor for Google now. I am
using typekit on these sites:
http://nawbogrrv.org/
http://customdesigntools.com/
http://kor
I only use it on H tags because of the load time. Removing unused
options like bold and italic helps, too. I have no patience for slow
computers, plus page speed is a ranking factor for Google now. I am
using typekit on these sites:
http://nawbogrrv.org/
http://customdesigntools.com/
http://k
That being said, if one font looks blocky on someone's
windows 95 box with IE 6, then all fonts look blocky, so they wouldn't
know the difference.
good point Christian. So - worth using? Do the load times have you
sitting there drumming your fingers wondering what's wrong, or is it
just a hai
On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 1:08 PM, Sandy wrote:
>
>> I use typekit and like it. The downside is load time. Also watch for
>> font rendering. It's different in different browsers.
>>
>> Shanna Cramer
>> http://thewebshoppe.net
>
> thanks Shanna.
> That's strange about the font rendering - I thought t
I use typekit and like it. The downside is load time. Also watch for
font rendering. It's different in different browsers.
Shanna Cramer
http://thewebshoppe.net
thanks Shanna.
That's strange about the font rendering - I thought the whole point was
that this could replace image fonts altogeth
I use typekit and like it. The downside is load time. Also watch for
font rendering. It's different in different browsers.
Shanna Cramer
http://thewebshoppe.net
On 10/19/10 10:43 AM, Sandy wrote:
Not sure about this one but what about TypeKit?
http://www.typekit.com
http://css-tricks.com
Not sure about this one but what about TypeKit?
http://www.typekit.com
http://css-tricks.com/video-screencasts/69-first-ten-minutes-with-typekit/
thanks - I hadn't heard of it. Have you tried typekit? Are you happy
with it?
Sandy
___
Not sure about this one but what about TypeKit?
http://www.typekit.com
http://css-tricks.com/video-screencasts/69-first-ten-minutes-with-typekit/
On Tue, 19 Oct 2010 11:32:06 -0400, Sandy wrote:
Has anyone used a font from
> http://www.webtype.com/
>
> is it possible that it's as easy as
Has anyone used a font from
http://www.webtype.com/
is it possible that it's as easy as they make it sound? Have you run
into any trouble?
thanks!
Sandy
__
css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org]
http://www.css-discuss.org/m
11 matches
Mail list logo
