views:

259

answers:

5

I found @font-face is good alternative of sIFR3 but every browser need different extension of font. so implementing is more than sIFR3.

But very good thing is FLASH and Javascript not needed.

Is there any cons to use @font-face in compare to sIFR3? I need compatibility in all A-Grade Browsers.

and

If any font which is freely available as a download on net or if font is purchased and provided by client or font is purchased by my company. in all condition can i use those fonts?

A: 

The worst is probably the delay for downloading the font where you'll see the original font first then, after a short delay, the downloaded font.

iirc, you don't need a different font extension for every browser. Only IE is different from all the others, as usual.

Rob
but this the problem with sIFR also. no we need different for other browsers also see here http://www.littleboxofideas.com/blog/tutorials/how-do-i-implement-font-face
metal-gear-solid
woff is new on Firefox but it still uses otf. Notice the article shows all the browsers work with otf, except IE, of course.
Rob
A: 

The biggest disadvantage of this technique right now is the browsers that support it.

See how people are trying to circumvent this disadvantage here: http://blog.themeforest.net/tutorials/how-to-achieve-cross-browser-font-face-support/

Ivo Sabev
+1  A: 

You may want to check out Cufon (http://cufon.shoqolate.com) or Typekit (http://typekit.com/) as well.

+1  A: 

You can use @font-face with:

For IE, the fallback is working great, but be sure to use the little hack for smooth rendering: http://allcreatives.net/2009/12/05/smoother-font-face-embedding-in-ie-7-8/

Issues :

ideotop
I think @font-face doesn't look smoother even on FF 3.6 like sIFR
metal-gear-solid