I believe I linked to the font squirrel site in my first post and so did Donboe but we could have explained ourselves more clearly perhaps as kenquad did :).
That’s the part that loses visitors to the page - the extra time it takes to download the font.Extra time to decide to hit the back button before the page finishes loading.
Which is why it’s nice to have a browser who shows some kind of default text right away… let the font sit there and load… I might be done reading by then but whatever.
But I remember something in the CSS3Live course about Saffy/Chrome not showing any text until the font has loaded? What a load… I’d be PO’d.
Remember that you will need quotes round any font names that have spaces in.
No, but I wasn’t talking about forcing people from their homes! 
I could basically force someone to view my web pages in Serif font and there isn’t much they could do unless they manually went in and changed their browsers.
You are reading too much into what I was saying.
Ever think it might be funky/obscure for a reason?
Ever ponder that the reason printed material looks so much more professional is because you have professional looking typeface?
If the text itself is not communicating your meaning, you’ve got the wrong text. “communicate artistically” is a bit like abundant poverty or recycling dump.
You’ve got to be kidding?! 
Then apparently you’ve never been to somewhere like Barnes & Noble and read a real paper book…
With the spoken word, 93% of communication is non-verbal.
Can’t say how that translates to the written world, but I can definitely tell you that 99% of written communication is NOT JUST the content. (If that was the case, SitePoint would be out of business and we’d all be using Mainframes to talk!!)
From an accessibility and bandwidth point of view there’s a reason no two browser makers on the same page on doing this, and why it’s just a REALLY BAD IDEA.
Where do you come up with this stuff?
The reason there is no “browser harmony” in the world is $$$ and indifference.
Some groups like W3C and SitePoint strive for standards, while others are driven by profits and a need to control the world (i.e. Oracle).
Using creative, yet sensible, non-standard typeface is not a sin, and people have been doing it well before your grandparents were alive…
Sometimes it just really helps to say “no” to your inner art-***.
Then stay with monospace font and you won’t have anything to worry about.
Though if you are going to do it, you could do worse than fontsquirrel’s approach of mixing all the different formats… even if it does end up a bandwidth chewing mess.
I’d recommend taking some college course on typography or even going to work for a printer or graphic artist (who would likely laugh you out of the county with your above comments).
Even in the digital world, typeface matters. And companies like Apple, Adobe, Microsoft, IBM, Citibank, Target, etc spend millions on “branding” that include choosing the right - read non-standard - typeface to communicate their messages.
Nothing personal, but you clearly don’t have any experience on this topic, because what you are saying spits in the face of about 200+ years of proven research on this topic.
But I digress…
Debbie
Yes, you did. But what I took from the first couple of posts was that it couldn’t be done or that it was difficult to do.
It’s all good.
(Even the great Paul O’ has off posts…) 
Debbie
Maybe that’s best practice, but it works for me without the quotes. Just tried it in FF 3.6 and IE 6 with the following code:
<html>
<head>
<style>
h1 {
font-family: microsoft sans serif, times new roman;
}
</style>
</head>
<body>
<h1>What font is this?</h1>
</body>
</html>
The text shows up in MS Sans Serif…
On the subject of bandwidth, it’s undeniable that using an extra font does affect the weight of your site. It’s worth noting, however, that it doesn’t add much more than an extra JPEG image or two, and that only on the first page a user visits with the font on it - thereafter the files will be cached. Also, FontSquirrel is really good about letting you narrow down the glyph set in each font to reduce file size.
Thanks for all of your help on this topic, Jason! 
Debbie
How so, on our personal computer, our broswer is our home. I know I have settings that helps me use the browser better. Forcing them to see comic sans extra curvy vs comic sans is the same thing… if you are relying too much on display. If you don’t care, i would suggest looking at your page in lynx or a terminal…
Ever ponder that the reason printed material looks so much more professional is because you have professional looking typeface?
…but this is not printed material… you can make a new stylesheet that gets all fancy when/if they print the page.
[QUOTE]From an accessibility and bandwidth point of view there’s a reason no two browser makers on the same page on doing this, and why it’s just a REALLY BAD IDEA. Sometimes it just really helps to say “no” to your inner art-***.
You’ve got to be kidding?!
Then apparently you’ve never been to somewhere like Barnes & Noble and read a real paper book…
With the spoken word, 93% of communication is non-verbal.
Can’t say how that translates to the written world, but I can definitely tell you that 99% of written communication is NOT JUST the content. (If that was the case, SitePoint would be out of business and we’d all be using Mainframes to talk!!)[/QUOTE]
He has a point with the accessibility stuff. Don’t believe me? ok open your word processor. Type something, you see it fine right? Now make it eh 5pt? little harder? For kicks, make it 300pt, little harder eh? that’s what you experience the page, if you have non perfect vision, mess with the fonts a lot.
For the book part… Maybe check out a book store yourself, i am pretty sure most of the book fonts will have close to the same font across the board…for a reason… readibility. AKA in web speak, usuability accessibility.
Nothing personal, but you clearly don’t have any experience on this topic, because what you are saying spits in the face of about 200+ years of proven research on this topic.
But I digress…
Debbie
200+ Years of research. 180-195 of those years being PURELY on print. The web world is not the print one. That being said read the following. They are all old but still valid
http://www.useit.com/alertbox/9602.html
http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20000723_printhistory.html
http://www.useit.com/alertbox/9710a.html
The whole “forcing on the user” issue seems somewhat moot to me; I believe the OP didn’t really mean “force” - more like “serve” as in “something other than the default.”
Even if we as designers did want to “force” our design ideas on users, the way the Internet works means that we simply can’t do it! Anything we program can be overridden, regardless of how bad the result might look to us. The user’s expressed preference always wins. (And I think that’s a good thing.)
Why do you assume that using a custom font has to look like the hand-writing of a 5-year old?
There are A LOT of fonts that not only look more professional than say, Arial, but that more legible.
For the book part…
I’ve seen this discussed at length in the past, and anyone who is a Typographer will tell you that using the right font/Typeface - even if non-standard - helps to increase legibility and accessibility, not hinder them.
You’re just making a broad-sweeping assumption that custom fonts = scribbles.
You are also making a huge assumption that someone like me is looking to use “scribble fonts” all over my website?! 
Sometimes it would be nice to have a non-standard font for an article heading, for a side-box, for an in-body quote, etc.
200+ Years of research. 180-195 of those years being PURELY on print. The web world is not the print one. That being said read the following. They are all old but still valid
http://www.useit.com/about/nographics.html
http://www.useit.com/alertbox/9707a.html
http://www.useit.com/alertbox/9602.html
http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20000723_printhistory.html
http://www.useit.com/alertbox/9710a.html
Try reading up on “graphic design” and “typography” and you’ll see what I’m looking for IS acceptible (and accessible)…
BTW, how many years have you been working with computers and web design??
Debbie
And the vast majority of those are professional fonts where the creator requires a fee per installation and the fonts cannot therefore legally be offered for download. Only those fonts that have been placed in the public domain or where the creator specifically allows web use can be used with web pages without relying on the visitor already having the font.
Almost all professional fonts can only be used if the visitor already has it.
There are quite a few exceptions. You can’t get much more than professional than Gentium and the Bitstreams, for instance - and those are now open source. I am using the former on a current design and finding it a big improvement.
Additionally, if you look through FontSquirrel’s database of fonts, it is much more than just a repository of “funky” typefaces - there are plenty of serious, legible, professional-looking fonts as well, particularly under the basic “Sans” and “Serif” style headings.
Google’s font offering, too, is dead serious and absolutely professional.
So, the choices are out there.
I am not saying that at all, i am saying some users may have trouble seeing a fancier font … just like you may have a hard time seeing times new roman at 3 or 5 pt. You will say, but Ryan I would never use that at 5pt. Exactly: if you are using a fancy font people may read it at 12 pt as you may read times at 5pt. But forcing a font they cannot get around it, unless they disable CSS, thus forcing a font is a waste. then at your other extreme, you have your typographers, thus forcing a font is a waste cause if it is a known ‘better/professional font’ they probably have it. Then your general public probably doesn’t care!
There are A LOT of fonts that not only look more professional than say, Arial, but that more legible.
relative
I’ve seen this discussed at length in the past, and anyone who is a Typographer will tell you that using the right font/Typeface - even if non-standard - helps to increase legibility and accessibility, not hinder them.
Yep for print, not the web. Thought you were making a website?
You’re just making a broad-sweeping assumption that custom fonts = scribbles. You are also making a huge assumption that someone like me is looking to use “scribble fonts” all over my website?!
Not at all! Please show me where I said that!
Try reading up on “graphic design” and “typography” and you’ll see what I’m looking for IS acceptible (and accessible)…
I am an accessibility expert, accessible is not the word you want to use here
BTW, how many years have you been working with computers and web design??
lol why does it matter? You will probably say I don’t know. Tell me why, I will answer
The only way I know of to “force” a font is to render an image. I wrote a PHP script that given a font and a phrase could return a gif and a png of the phrase - sufficient for use in headers within reason, but you still have to fallback to default fonts for large text areas.
I too wish there was a way to implement more fonts but, alas, that’s not really in the cards for HTML any time soon.
If you’re talking about print then I would agree with you - but I’m less convinced by that for screen use. At a typical text size on screen resolution, most fonts don’t look that good. Only a small number of fonts that have been specifically designed for screen use work really well. Sure, sub-pixel rendering has improved this a little bit, but it’s still the case that a lot of fonts that look great when printed just don’t work well for screen use. Those that do, like Verdana, Calibri, Georgia, Trebuchet and so on are in widespread use on people’s computers already.
I’m not saying “don’t ever use a different font”, but just “remember that typography on the web is different from typography in print”.
PS - don’t worry about DeathShadow, he’s always like that. To be fair, he’s a lot calmer than he used to be :goof:
The suggestions by kenquad can be over-ridden by the end, right?
And for those ho are uber concerned about “accessibility”, have an option on your home page to change the fonts… (I bet you don’t go that far on your websites… do you? If not, then aren’t you doing the same thing?)
then at your other extreme, you have your typographers, thus forcing a font is a waste cause if it is a known ‘better/professional font’ they probably have it. Then your general public probably doesn’t care!
I’ve gotten your concerns.
You’re “splitting hairs” at this point.
[QUOTE]You’re just making a broad-sweeping assumption that custom fonts = scribbles. You are also making a huge assumption that someone like me is looking to use “scribble fonts” all over my website?!
Not at all! Please show me where I said that!
Not at all! Please show me where I said that![/QUOTE]
If a custom-font, that was open-source, easily downloadable, easier to read, and “prettier” than a standard font could be had, why would you not consider it?
Arguing to argue?
I am an accessibility expert, accessible is not the word you want to use here
What I’m looking for isn’t overly prohibitive or anti-accessibility or anything else.
And my choice of “force” in my OP is being blown out of proportion.
But more so, sometime you just can’t (or don’t want to) cater to everyone.
Maybe you don’t like my choice of colors, fonts, layouts, etc, and even if it can be tweaked, when it is, it is still so inaccessible that you decide not to stay on my website.
So be it.
That’s life sometimes!
I personally hate how AOL and Yahoo are laid out, and I don’t visit those websites, and Yahoo and AOL don’t miss me, so the distaste is mutual!!
lol why does it matter? You will probably say I don’t know. Tell me why, I will answer
Because you come across in this post like a newbie that doesn’t have the perspective of- or appreciation for - what generations of Printing and Typography brought to this world.
In case you didn’t get the memo - and I don’t believe you did - there was, is, and will be life beyond your computer and the limited perspective that “all-things-digital” (do not) add to life…
I used to working in a printing company in college, and I know a lot of people that would laugh some of the comments on this thread out the door.
There is more than one way to skin a cat…
And life is much richer and fuller when you “push the envelope” and don’t follow what the masses do (think Internet Explorer 6)!
I do believe you can “have your cake and eat it too” if you think things out, and as far as I’m concerned, kenquad’s recommendations get me one step closer to that state!
So, BLAH!!!
Debbie
All you dudes…
I was JUST innocently re-reading my SitePoint book - “The CSS Anthology” - and wondering if a person could import different fonts like they can with style-sheets and images and so on, so I figured I would ask while it was on my mind.
I was also just trying to “think out of the box” and design at a more sophisticated level than the masses.
My intent was not to open up a heated debate, and my stance has been pretty flexible. (I am not a persons with disabilities hater! I just like “creative control”.)
And kenquad has been the most laid back and helpful so far.
PS - don’t worry about DeathShadow, he’s always like that. To be fair, he’s a lot calmer than he used to be :goof:
So people just like to argue…
Glad I didn’t ask anything controversial on here?! 
Debbie
Gotta say, I’m with Debbie on this topic.
Every web technology is progressing, otherwise the @font-face rule would never have been created. The development of HTML5 and CSS3 and, might I add, browsers that support them (note: they support these new technologies for a reason), prove that the web is getting more artistic and becoming more and more the realm of designers and not just the programmers of the 90s who want mono-spaced, primary-color goodness all over the place.
That being said: there is a time and place for everything. If a site’s audience is older, I’d say, yeah, you probably don’t need to go with the something too complex and “artsy” (as it has been so elegantly referenced) and is going to be a … how was it put?
a bandwidth chewing mess
Yes, I believe it will be. The older crowd wants simple, quick and things that won’t “blow up my computer”.
Now, if your users are in the younger generation, they probably have computers that aren’t dinosaurs, and they are going to connect better with the site over all. So, go for it, express yourself through your site!
At least, that’s my two cents on the topic.
Lol think about what you asked… the answer is yes if the user knows what they need to do. In working in accessibility for ~7 years I can say most people don’t know how to adjust these settings without being shown. With standard CSS, it says look for this font, if not use x,y,z if defined, if not use browser default. With @font-face it says look for ‘my cool font’, oh you can’t find it? Here is a link you can temporarily download it, and use it.
And for those ho are uber concerned about “accessibility”, have an option on your home page to change the fonts… (I bet you don’t go that far on your websites… do you? If not, then aren’t you doing the same thing?)
I used to,…
If a custom-font, that was open-source, easily downloadable, easier to read, and “prettier” than a standard font could be had, why would you not consider it?
easier to read, prettier is all relative. Just like teens think TyPiNg LiKe ThIs LoOkS coOl AnD eAsY tO rEaD…
Arguing to argue?
Nope, standing up for accessibility…
Because you come across in this post like a newbie that doesn’t have the perspective of- or appreciation for - what generations of Printing and Typography brought to this world.
Lmao.
I used to working in a printing company in college, and I know a lot of people that would laugh some of the comments on this thread out the door.
-golf clap- I worked at a major university (45K students) as an accessibility guy, been offered jobs at three major companies, as an accessibility guy… I currently work as an … accessibility specialist. So newbie, lol ok