2 ms·
> How did you detect it was missing < p > tags? Just opened it up in the inspector in Firefox, no black magic here ;-) I would definitely look into your font
by skore 12y ago
> How did you detect it was missing < p > tags?
Just opened it up in the inspector in Firefox, no black magic here ;-)
I would definitely look into your font names - it tells me that "Lato-Hairline" is used as: "Lato" and "Lato Regular" is used as: "@font-face:Lato". So perhaps the issue is that Lato-Hairline is the font-weight = 100 and Firefox picks it over the other one, only finds the single font-weight and sticks with it?
Just a guess though, webfonts can be weird. For instance: For Chrome, it can depend on what version you use. Just today I ran into a font rendering bug similar to this one where Chromium versions 37&38 had their font-weights switched so that 300 ended up as 500 and 500 was also picked for "normal". So the bug report "all fonts are bold and it looks terrible" resulted in "CANTFIX old Chrome be weird", basically.
- brianwski 12y agoCool, thanks! I have forwarded the info, it's actually been driving me slightly bonkers. The designer uses a Macintosh, but my primary development box with a 30" monitor happens to be BOTH Macintosh OR Windows (KVM switch) and when I see our blog in Windows it looks terrible.