2 ms·
I don't find this convincing. For one, many sites don't need web fonts to begin with. For two, the sites that do can use `font-display` or, even better, just le
by Etheryte 1y ago
I don't find this convincing. For one, many sites don't need web fonts to begin with. For two, the sites that do can use `font-display` or, even better, just let the browser figure it out. Browser developers have spent way more time on these problems than any one of us individually ever will and more often than not, the behavior you get out of the box is already pretty fine.
- 90s_dev 1y agoAs a user of websites, I definitely notice when a website uses web fonts and relies on font-display. Preloading them is the only way to avoid jarring changes to the layout. Even if the changes are relatively small, they're very jarring. I won't do that to users of my sites. It's not hard to take care of properly.
- Etheryte 1y agoThat's a very subjective take on what properly means in this context. Many would argue that serving the content is the main thing that matters to your users, and if your font takes so long to load that you need to deal with it separately, it would be better to not do that to begin with. To put another way, as a fellow user of websites, I would much rather read what's written than look at a blank page while some marginally different version of Helvetica is fetched in the background.
- 90s_dev 1y agoThat's the point of preloads. You don't need to choose. As soon as the HTML is loaded, the font is ready. You see the HTML immediately (about 10-20ms) with the web font. Win win.