Readable Web » Browsers

The Look That Says Book – On AListApart

Richard Fink — Tue, 07 Sep 2010 12:34:24 +0000

An article I wrote about Hypenation & Justification in web design was published on AListApart today. Titled: The Look That Says Book.

Please visit the comments page and weigh in on how you feel about the current level of support for hyphenation and justification in browsers.
Do you think H&J is important? Not? OK, then what? I’d like to hear what you think.

Sidenote: Editors – Wow, What A Concept!

Unfortunately, the nature of blogging is such that input from an editor just isn’t feasible except in rare instances. So it’s incredibly refreshing to work with sharp, technically astute editors like those at ALA.
Much thanks.

Destination Web At ATYPI

Richard Fink — Sun, 05 Sep 2010 17:34:28 +0000

As someone who writes a lot about fonts and typography, I joined some professional associations. In addition to SOTA, which I joined last year, I am also a new member of ATYPI, the Association Typographique Internationale. ATYPI’s annual conference is being held in Dublin, Ireland. I proposed giving a talk on Web Font formats, and the decision makers at ATYPI graciously accepted. I’m looking forward to it greatly.
Here’s what I pitched as the topic of my talk:

Destination Web: Preparing Fonts For The Browser

For the past fifteen years, web authors have been restricted to a handful of “web safe” fonts provided by the underlying operating systems like Microsoft Windows or Apple’s OS X within which web browsers are installed. This has now changed.

As of early 2010, the five major Internet browsers – Internet Explorer, Firefox, Opera, Safari, and Chrome – have all implemented various means and levels of support for “web fonts”. That is, fonts that are supplied, not by the underlying operating system, but by web servers.

This is an unprecedented development in the history of type. For the first time, there is a nascent mass-market for type, without a publisher or some other entity, acting as intermediary. Even in the past few decades of digital technology, the font-design community as a whole has remained print-oriented and the peculiar problems of creating fonts for the low-resolution environment of computer display screens have been left largely to the makers of operating systems such as Microsoft. But now, with the change in capabilities of web browsers, over the coming years, font designers will increasingly find their fonts making their way onto web pages. And this new usage, this new destination, brings with it new challenges to which font-designers, if their work is to remain relevant, need adapt.

As the sophistication of display technology and devices like the Kindle and the iPad improve, and as the demand for paperless green technology grows, the assumptions under which the type industry has worked since Gutenberg’s time, will undergo a radical change.

There will be a great need to provide fonts that are browser-friendly and work well in a low-resolution environments as opposed to the high-resolution environment of print. In addition, web browsers demand connectivity – fonts are sent digitally, on demand, and therefore need to be specially prepared for travel. The need to prepare fonts for speedy delivery and in browser-friendly formats is, once again, an unprecedented development.

Eventually, screen usage will most certainly come to dwarf print. But oddly, with the advent and continued sophistication of one-off and short-run print technology, browsers are poised to do double duty – not only as viewers but as more traditional desktop publishing applications, as well. Even today, if the number of web pages printed out on any given day were taken into account, it would amount to a significant portion of printed output, in total.

The presentation will include:

1) A brief overview of how fonts are linked to web pages with a special emphasis on backwards-compatibility issues regarding Internet Explorer 6, 7, and 8 about which I am uniquely informed.

2) Current formatting options such as: EOT, EOT “Lite”, WOFF, SVG, and Data URI’s

3) IP Protection/Obfuscation Techniques such as: File Splitting, font renaming, and sub-setting

4) Tools: The current state of the tools available for preparing fonts for the web 5. Print: The current state of browsers as a desktop publishing platform for print.

WOFF Support In Chrome Starts Up

Richard Fink — Sat, 28 Aug 2010 21:45:00 +0000

WOFF web fonts are now live in Version 6 Beta of Chrome for Win XP, Win 7, and MAC OS X, as well.

Days away? A week away?

Version 6 Beta seems pretty stable.

A simple test page.

Here is an image of what you should see in any browser if WOFF support is there:

John Daggett On CSS3 At TypeCon, 2010

Richard Fink — Sun, 22 Aug 2010 17:10:03 +0000

John Hudson of Tiro Typeworks and Christopher Slye of Adobe arranged a briefing – a guide to the perplexed – by Firefox developer and editor of the W3C CSS3 Fonts Module, John Daggett.

John Daggett has kindly posted his slides.
Dave Crossland has kindly posted his notes.
Photos of the event are posted in an album on Readable Web’s Facebook photo gallery.

California Dreamin’

As Simon Daniels of Microsoft put it on the TypeCon feed, these links are the closest thing to having been there “minus the element of spending a sunny afternoon in an underground bunker with a bunch of geeky web font geeks”.
This is true. But we emerged from the bunker with good tidings: the CSS3 Fonts Module has come a long way and Daggett says there’s a possibility it will move to Candidate Recommendation status by the end of this year. Truly impressive and unusually speedy work by the WG and its panel of Invited Experts. Many parts of the draft will be implemented in IE9 and Firefox 4. With other browser makers expected to follow. As John Hudson said during the Web Fonts panel discussion a few days later, “The standards process works.”
Considering the pessimism last year, quite amazing.

Web typography and a standards process that works. Wow++.

TypeCon 2010: A New Birth Of Type

Richard Fink — Fri, 20 Aug 2010 17:10:59 +0000

As good as digital gets there is still no replacement for face-to-face. Never will be. The only thing that a human really understands is other humans. Facial expression, tone of voice, body language – the real people deal – there’s just no way to get that from afar. Technology allows us to adopt a persona in our communications, and the only way past that is to be there.
Ya gotta get out of the office.

The Past Has Passed

It’s amazing how much has changed since last year. Here at TypeCon, there is a new mood: a growing acceptance that the future of fonts is onscreen. A feeling of relief is in the air. Decisions have been made. Last night, in a keynote kick-off, Roger Black of the Font Bureau focused on screen fonts and, with optimism, stated the obvious – that the font industry has to rethink the business of type because there is no going back. Roger was understandably a little light on details but the last slide in his accompanying Powerpoint demo was a price: “99 Cents”

News And Links

Webtype

Webtype, a partnership between Font Bureau and Ascender Corp, has finally launched. Without even looking, I know the fonts look good. Webtype has a blog, too. See: New Web Font Service Launched by Partnership of Experts
FinkTip: Stop with the “we are the experts” stuff. Nobody cares. Self-congratulatory mumbo doesn’t convince anybody of anything. (Unless you’re trying to convince yourself, which is really what sales copy like that is about.) Pronouncements from on high about your own expertise doesn’t work onscreen. It only undermines the effort.
And if I see from anybody, “use fonts legally” as marketing pitch, I’m going to scream. I’m screaming right now. You might as well hang a sign that says, “Hack me, please!” And how many potential customers, pray tell, are even going to understand what you’re talking about? This is just the reality. Why not be explicit and tell customers that if they don’t do business with you, they could potentially get sued? That would be charming, eh? Either get into it, in detail, or cut the FUD. It just detracts.

Fontfonter

Some guys from Fontshop have put together a web font preview site called FontFonter which lets you see their fonts as applied to external sites. Conspicuously missing is support for Internet Explorer. I don’t think it’s a technical issue but I could be wrong. I have noticed an ideological bias – unstated, but certainly there – against Internet Explorer at Fontshop. I don’t know if it’s a beef with Microsoft in general, or what.
I’ll be trying to get to the bottom of it and will report. [Update: see report that follows]

FinkRetract: (Concerning the deleted above) I met up with Stephen Coles and Ivo Gabrowitsch of Fontshop today and was assured that there is no bias against IE and that Fontfonter’s lack of support for IE is purely technical. They just can’t make the font swap-out work in IE. And they are quite glad that Microsoft held the line and helped bring about WOFF so no biases there, either. Love is in the air. My bad for reading into things.

Typecon Pics On Facebook

I’ve been trying to get a handle on my new Canon Rebel X4 camera – and dammit I’m going to do it no matter how long it takes – and have been posting pics on Readable Web’s Facebook Page. Check it out. You might be tagged!

Good Web Fonts

Educator Laura Franz – who I met last night – has put together a side-by-side comparison site for body fonts called Good Web Fonts. Great idea. Check it out.

The Web Font Awards – A Contest

Monotype Imaging will be sponsoring a web fonts contest. The site is called Web Font Awards. Brand new. No details as yet. Kudos to Monotype for this idea. The world holds one surprise after another. Now how do we get more web designers to attend a conference like this? Two hour Web Font “panels” are fine but in the world Roger Black is describing, fonts on the web are the main event with two hour panels on print fonts.

Playing Up WOFF At TypeCon, LA

Richard Fink — Wed, 18 Aug 2010 19:14:30 +0000

[Los Angeles, CA]
The W3C is seizing the opportunity to publicize WOFF – the Web Open Font Format – in conjunction with TypeCon here in LA.

Here are some relevant links:

W3C Opens Typography on the Web
WOFF Frequently Asked Questions
W3C Leads Discussion at TypeCon 2010 on New Open Web Font Format (WOFF)

The Lions Get Down With The Lambs

In the legal wrangling surrounding font licensing, WOFF is a kind “settlement” between browser makers and commercial font producers. The hoopla reminds me of the settlement between Google Books and the publishing industry. On a technical level, WOFF doesn’t do much except provide compression and a small barrier to installation in an OS like Windows, but at least it puts an end to the acrimony and that’s a lot in and of itself. We can move on. And so the W3C, major font producers like Microsoft, Adobe, Monotype Imaging, and others are hailing it as a big achievement.

It is. And congrats to all who made it happen.

Last night there was a “WOFF” party sponsored by Microsoft held at the Otis School of Art and Design. I was jet lagged and kept a low profile. I did vow, however, to find the person responsible for the eccentric vegetarian cuisine and make them pay. As font designer Juliet Chen said, maybe it was just a trendy West Coast/LA thing.

Today John Daggett of Mozilla and editor of the CSS3 Fonts Module, will be briefing attendees about the work of the W3C Fonts working group and the CSS3 Fonts Module. This was arranged and sponsored by Tiro Typeworks (John Hudson and Ross Mills).
A great idea and thanks in advance. Readable Web will be there.

I think I’ll bring along a bag of Doritos, just in case.

Microsoft WOFFles On SVG Web Fonts In IE9

Richard Fink — Sat, 07 Aug 2010 20:56:11 +0000

In a post on the IE Blog, the following excuse was given for not supporting SVG Fonts:

“As IE9 has implemented more of the standards that developers use and value, IE9’s Acid3 score has continued to rise. The remaining points involve two particular technologies (SVG Fonts and SMIL animation of SVG) that are in transition.

Support for SVG Fonts in the web development and font communities has been declining for some time. There’s already been discussion without objection of dropping SVG fonts from the Acid3 test. The community has put forth a proposal in the SVG Working Group to give SVG Fonts optional status.

Instead, developers can use the Web Open Font Format (WOFF, supported in IE9 Platform Preview 3 as well as other browsers) for both HTML and SVG content. It works well in conjunction with the CSS3 Fonts module and has broad support from leading font vendors (e.g. here, “a majority of font makers have already settled on WOFF or services like Typekit as their format of choice”). WOFF fonts are a better long-term solution for many reasons discussed previously.

Here is my reply as it appeared in the comments:

I find this post’s explanation for tossing SVG Fonts under the bus completely unpersuasive. I don’t know what to make of it. You’ve written nothing about the technical merits or the lack thereof of SVG Fonts at all. Just excusy dance-arounds.

“Support for SVG Fonts in the web development and font communities has been declining for some time.“

To what kind of “support” are you referring? Actual implementations or enthusiasm about the technology? If the latter, who’s enthusiasm has waned?

Did somebody do a poll?

Chrome, Safari, and Opera all have running code for SVG Fonts.

“There’s already been discussion without objection of dropping SVG fonts from the Acid3 test. The community has put forth a proposal in the SVG Working Group to give SVG Fonts optional status.“

First, I object. So now you have an objection.

Second, so what? Are you in favor of SVG Fonts or not? Does it give developers valuable options that they would not otherwise have, or not?

“Instead, developers can use the Web Open Font Format (WOFF, supported in IE9 Platform Preview 3 as well as other browsers) for both HTML and SVG content.“

Huh? Excuse me for being a little in the dark here, but could you be specific about where and how WOFF – which is a wrapped TTF or OTF file and works no differently than the system installed web-safe fonts – can be manipulated via script in the way SVG fonts can be? Are you saying WOFF is *the same* as SVG Fonts?

“It works well in conjunction with the CSS3 Fonts module and has broad support from leading font vendors (e.g. here, “a majority of font makers have already settled on WOFF or services like Typekit as their format of choice”).“

This has the standards process backwards and it isn’t even true. If it’s true, prove it.

“WOFF fonts are a better long-term solution for many reasons“

Says you. What are the differences, why are you declining to suport SVG Fonts, *that* is the point.

Some elaboration would be appreciated.

Regards,

Rich

I think everybody deserves a truthful and rational explanation for any decision that effects digital publishing as profoundly as the display of fonts. From any browser maker. And especially from Microsoft who writes so many rules of the game.
Whatever disagreements there may be between some font producers and myself there is no disagreement on this: type is important, it’s fundamental. If questions are raised and the answer is, simply, “Suck it up. This is what we’ve decided to do.”, that may or may not be OK – it depends upon what we’re talking about – but I’d rather hear that, than jive posing as reason supported by wishes presented as facts.

What’s WOFF Got To Do With It?

Tina Turner sang that, right? What’s WOFF but a second hand emotion…♫♪♫♫
Anyway, to end, here’s an example of SVG fonts at work. Viewable in Opera, Chrome, and Safari:
http://devfiles.myopera.com/articles/593/webfonts_in_svg.svg

E-Book Formats: The Mad Scramble

Richard Fink — Thu, 01 Jul 2010 14:37:40 +0000

I haven’t been reporting much on developments in the e-reader biz lately. Simple reason: I can’t keep up and I don’t think it pays at this point to even try. I’m enjoying the shake out, though.

The mad scramble is being driven by two factors:
1) Screen technology has gone mobile in a big way – with the Kindle, Nook, iPad, iPhone, Android, and so forth and so on.
All the stuff you could possibly have the time to read can now travel with you. And if that isn’t enough, even more stuff you’ll never ever have the time to read can be sent wirelessly to you.
2) These screens do provide a satisfying reading experience. And they are getting better all the time.

The New iPhone’s “Retina” Display

I checked out the new iPhone with it’s ultra-sharp Retina display the other day and it was amazing, really. As an iPhone user, I was very skeptical about it being worth the hassle and expense of an upgrade, but to these tired old eyes, it definitely is. I’ve simply never seen a display with text as crisp and sharp at small sizes as I saw on the new iPhone. I did a side-by-side comparison with my current phone and all I could say was, “Wow”. The next day I was using my wife’s iPad for something and I couldn’t help but try to imagine what it would be like if the iPad had the same quality screen as the new iPhone. Wow++. Only a matter of time, I suppose.

E-Reader? Got One. It’s Called A Browser.

And so, everybody’s scrambling to establish themselves as the dominant platform or format or application, or something or other for the burgeoning market for “books onscreen”.

Here’s a simple fact that, for me, stands out: All day long I read from an application called a browser. You’ve heard of them, right? Internet Explorer, Firefox, Chrome – those guys. But yet, when it comes to paper books that have been ported onscreen, I’m being asked to use some other application called an E-Reader.

Why? What’s wrong with this picture? Are the words in a paper book different than the words on a blog?

As you ponder this question, check out the free browser-based Ibis Reader. (Yes, for the iPhone/iPad it’s an app. A matter of screen real-estate, I suppose. When will mobile Safari support full-screen mode?)

I’m also keeping an eye on Blio, new e-publishing software that seems to be a little different from the rest of the pack, but we’ll see when it soon debuts.

Wanna e-publish? Jeffrey Zeldman posted a nice, brief roundup with some juicy links a couple of days ago.

FontCONF In Minneapolis/St. Paul

Richard Fink — Fri, 18 Jun 2010 11:53:43 +0000

It’s Tomorrow, And Free. Please come.

If you’re in the Minneapolis/St. Paul area and you’re into design, web design, web fonts, fonts, typography, or anything at all like the forementioned, please come to FontCONF tomorrow, Saturday, June 19th at:
CoCo – Coworking and Collaborative Space
213 4th St E., St Paul, MN

FontCONF

Organized by Garrick Van Buren of the font service and download site Kernest, a great time is guaranteed for all.

In the morning, font designer Chank Deisel will be leading a session where an entire font will be constructed as a collaborative effort. As part of a team, I’ll also be facilitating a session in the afternoon. There will be surprises. Fun. Laughter and learning.

Greatly looking forward to it. Hope you can come.

Addendum To Conference:

As some readers of this blog know, an article I wrote about fonts on the web was published on AlistApart Magazine about ten days ago. Unfortunately, Bill Davis of font producer Ascender Corp, took issue with some of the things I wrote about Ascender’s new web font services.

As it turned out, Bill flew in from Chicago to a attend FontCONF, and I’m sorry to report that all the bad blood boiled over, things got completely out of hand, and there was a brawl. Luckily, someone had a camera and captured the incident:

Davis and Fink square off with scornful laughter, each confident of victory.

Witneses to this unfortunate confrontation included font designers Mark Simonson, Stu Sandler, and Chank Deisel. However, after a delicious dinner at a nearby steak house in St. Paul, both men declined to press charges.

Readable Web At AnEventApart, Boston

Richard Fink — Sun, 23 May 2010 16:05:23 +0000

Boston, Massachusetts Readable Web is getting out of the office this year. I’ll be attending and reporting on a wide variety of events.

Starting with:

AnEventApart, Boston

I’ve never attended one of Zeldman & Meyer’s traveling road shows before and I can’t wait. The event kicks off tonight with a meet and greet at the Westin Copley Hotel sponsored by Extensis who is here to preview their new web font service WebInk.

Over the next few days I’ll be posting pics, twittering, muttering, commenting about just how tall Jeff Veen really looks in person, and reporting on everything and anything that happens to spark an idea in my brain.

Details on this conference and upcoming Event Apart conferences here.

Update: After-Conference Thoughts

Call it what you want: web design, digital publishing, whatever – the problems exist on two levels.

Problem 1: Cutting The Bullshit

This problem is not unique to digital publishing but to all publishing: staying on message, staying focused, writing clearly, keeping it brief – all the trite truisms are just as true today as they were when David Ogilvy wrote Ogilvy On Advertising in 1983 and Rudolph Flesch wrote The Art Of Readable Writing in 1949. Nobody is going to give you or your product more than a passing glance. At least at first. Waste people’s time and they’re gone. Click.

This is why I perked up when Luke Wroblewski argued that you should design your small-screen mobile experience first and build your desktop experience from that kernel. I agree. Working from the inside out like that imposes a discipline that would probably not exist if you started with the desktop experience. And if you can’t seem to cut it all down to it’s essence for an iPhone or Android, it’s time to ask yourself why the site exists in the first place.

Problem 2: Re-Tasking Content For Different Devices And Screen Sizes

It used to be that the difference between user agents (browsers) was the thing that drove web authors crazy. Yes, there are still issues, but it’s easy to envision a time in the near future when that won’t be anything more than an occasional and minor annoyance. The monster facing us now is different devices and screen sizes. This is a tough one – and the mental tools publishers need are just beginning to coalesce.

Recently, on Typophile.com, designer John Hudson made the observation that, to him, websites in general resembled scrapbooks. For some reason I’ve been thinking about that comment a lot and finally realized why: minus the negative connotations of the word “scrap”, they are scrapbooks. Chunks of information being fed in and out from disparate sources on the network and placed together on the same “page”. The equivalent of taking chunks of five or six pages of a book or magazine and pasting them together. Even in an era of relatively high resolution screens this will still be the case. Content must be chunked so it can reflow into its container. And connectedness is a requirement – the idea of an “e-book” on an “e-reader” disconnected from the net is already preposterous – even though we’ll be living with that situation for some time to come.

I got a new TV delivered today. It’s connected to the network, too. A TV with web apps. A giant iPad. Who’d a thunk?

And, oh, yeah. Just to cap off AnEventApart, Boston:

How Tall Is Jeffrey Veen?

Meeting Jeff Veen in person was a bit of a shock, really. For a guy who writes and speaks about all this web stuff, turns out the guy’s tall enough to be my father!

Oops, Capped Off Too Soon

[A Bit More On An EventApart, Boston] Here’s a nice roundup of the event called Themes From AnEventApart Boston with a link also, to Luke Wroblewski’s extensive notes from the conference. Also, Luke and the concept of “Mobile First” gets a treatment on the Big Web Show.