HTML and CSS Reference
In-Depth Information
Yo u c a n a c h i e v e a l of t u s i n g d i ff e r e n t w e i g h t s of f j u s t of n e t y p e f a c e , a s e v i d e n c e d
by excellent sites, such as Simon Collison's personal site, ( Figure 3.7 ).
All the fonts have agreed licenses for using them on the web. The font files are
optimized as much as they can be to reduce file size, and although your users will
still have to download them to use them, you can place the server burden on the
font service, which reduces your bandwidth burden.
Each service has advantages and disadvantages: I prefer Fontdeck because it
is slightly more intuitive to use than the others. Also, the restrictions are not as
limited for testing purposes; you pay per font, and it doesn't require JavaScript like
Typekit does. It might work out to be slightly more expensive, but the costs are
pretty minor either way.
FIGURE 3.7 is
entirely typeset in Times New
Roman. Would you believe it?
NOTE: You can see some examples of Typekit and Fontdeck in action at http:// and http://people. I've also included these
examples in the chapter3 code download folder, but you'll only see the
font examples working on the preceding URLs, because my Fontdeck and
Typekit examples were tied to that domain at the time.
Search WWH ::

Custom Search