denniss
Administrator
Todd shared this link with me the other day and I have to say it is pretty awesome: http://cufon.shoqolate.com/generate/
It is a pure javascript font replacement solution. I have used sIFR before and get really frustrated with inconsistencies. Plus, this eliminates the need to use flash just to render a typeface.
It worked great on the site I used it on but just started playing with it. Has anyone else used it?
Ricky Irvine
Member
Haven't used it yet, but have been intrigued by it as I'm seeing it mentioned more and and more. I might try it out.
Bryan V.
Member
It's so weird that you posted this as I was looking into SiFR for the first time the other day and just posted something on Twitter about it a little while ago. I think I like this one better.
davidyeiser
Member
Todd Budnikas
Key Master
@ricky posted the following on Twitter this evening, followed by this response. Now I understand and respect the rights of font designers. We actually had a conversation today about Veer fonts today, and although $400 for a family of 4 fonts seems steep, I don't think it's unreasonable. That being said, I appreciate the creators of Cufon ensuring their software respects the rights and privileges of type designers and foundries, but if the owner/creator like TypeTrust states their fonts are not to be used in this way, we are forced to use more traditional methods, like creating an image out of the font.
I didn't read all the documentation on http://www.fontembedding.com, but I guess this just becomes an issue of security, right? It has little to do with the end user, but how the fonts are displayed and rendered, which to me, sucks. The folks building applications like SiFR and Cufon are trying to overcome limitations of the browsers we have to work in and in many cases we may not be able to use these solutions.
I thought it was interesting and maddening that a concept like this might not be a viable solution for us over issues that could be simulated with just a slightly different, yet less efficient method, like creating background images and displaying using CSS.
Ricky Irvine
Member
Here's the response I got from TypeTrust when asked about their EULA in regard to Cufón:
Thanks for the inquiry. At a glance, we are inclined to say this is not permissible without a license extension and appropriate fees.
We have been weary of web embedding as it often involves explicit breaches of our EULA, such as redistribution and decompilation of font software. As technology is constantly changing, we do our best to meet the needs of our users as well as protect the work and rights of the type designers we represent. With further investigation, we may choose to update the terms of our EULA to reflect our position on new issues. Until then, we reserve the right to disallow any use not explicitly permitted by the TypeTrust EULA. This would be one of those unspecified uses.
Just to get your perspective as a web developer, how valuable is this technology to your work? Have you truly grown that weary of Georgia and Lucida Grande that you'd like to set web text in Cooter Deuce? ;-)
Seems to me they are more concerned with their fonts getting into unlicensed hands ("redistribution and decompilation"). On the other hand, it sounds like if enough web developers make it known that they'd like a EULA that allows web embedding through something like Cufón (especially if it's proven secure against "redistribution and decompilation"), they might be convinced to look into it more willfully.
Thommy
Member
Cameron Moll recently wrote about Cufón:
http://cameronmoll.com/archives/2009/03/cufon_font_embedding/
Summary: He likes it.
Todd Budnikas
Key Master
A good read, although didn't learn much new. Glad that the word is getting out though. However, still doesn't make it a viable solution unfortunately since the EULAs are going to get in the way in most cases until foundries start updating them.
My summary: I like it too, wish I could use it.
You must log in to post.
Please wait while my tweets load 
