All three of the technologies I have mentioned (sIFR, FLIR and @font-face) have their own place as far as production and design are concerned. sIFR might be considered the lesser of the three, with its lack of CSS inbuilt CSS integration and its dependence on a technology that seems a little unnecessary for static components. Read the rest of this entry

 

…is a CSS method for specifying and embedding online fonts for display purpose. It is both a relatively new and old technology as it is supported in IE 6+ and recently in Safari 3.2+, Firefox 3.5+ and Chrome 4.0.2+ and has been long awaited by developers since its arrival in 1998. Technically it is not actually a font replacement technology but rather a CSS rule, however you can actually replace a font face (such as 'Arial') using this technique.

Read the rest of this entry

 

…stands for Facelift Image Replacement. It is also known as Facelift. The methodology of this is very similar to sIFR in that it uses JavaScript to replace text elements, but this uses 32 bit PNG images to replace text.

Read the rest of this entry

 

…stands for scalable Inman Flash Replacement. It allows the designer to use the font of their choice by embedding it in Flash (SWF) and then, using JavaScript, hide the text of each selected HTML element and embed a SWF file that displays the text as their font family choice.

Read the rest of this entry

Having spent the last couple of years studying and integrating Font Replacement technology and removing it and plugging it in again and configuring CSS values in 5 different browsers and chewing bits of rubber foam off my decrepit stress ball… I found it would be quite generous to relieve you, the blogger/web designer/web developer of causing any further harm to inanimate objects.