4 ms·
That was very useful, especially for non-designers like me who do design because we have to. Thanks! Almost everything made sense, except the sIFR thing at the
by randomwalker 18y ago
That was very useful, especially for non-designers like me who do design because we have to. Thanks! Almost everything made sense, except the sIFR thing at the very end (slide 133 or so), where you pipe text through javascript and then flash just so you can force the viewer to look at it in your fancy-ass font. That sounds like a terrible idea from designers who have no understanding of the web, data, standards, navigation or accessibility and believe the point of web design is to make things look exactly like print.
- tel 18y agoI feel a need to defend sIFR. It was actually very carefully designed in order to preserve standards, navigation, and accessibility. sIFR is designed to a) be frosting on top of a standards compliant HTML cake and b) fail very gracefully in every combination of javascript or flash availability. When you design using sIFR you are heavily encouraged to build the design with common web fonts first and then simply overlay the sIFR to be optionally rendered when possible. It even preserves behaviors like anchoring and copy/paste. The idea does, at first, sound extremely convoluted and toxic, but should be instead thought of as a really clever hack to make interesting typographic design possible despite constraints of font distribution online.