<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Fleeting Epiphanies &#187; fonts</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.w3conversions.com/tag/fonts/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.w3conversions.com</link>
	<description>realizations on life, the web, and everything</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 12 Mar 2015 20:41:55 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.4</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Font Smoothing — It&#8217;s not just for Webkit anymore</title>
		<link>http://blog.w3conversions.com/2014/04/font-smoothing-webkit-firefox/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.w3conversions.com/2014/04/font-smoothing-webkit-firefox/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Apr 2014 19:27:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Stephanie Rewis</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[CSS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bug]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[contatta]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[firefox]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fonts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[webkit]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.w3conversions.com/?p=988</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I ran into a very frustrating bug while using icon fonts on our site at Contatta. A bug I filed last April, and nurtured through the process of getting fixed, didn&#8217;t make the Mozilla release notes (though it was included in Firefox 28). Because I feel it&#8217;s a very useful solution, I wanted to bring [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p></p><p>I ran into a very frustrating bug while using icon fonts on our site at <a href="http://www.contatta.com" target="_blank">Contatta</a>. A <a href="https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=857142#c75" target="_blank">bug I filed</a> last April, and nurtured through the process of getting fixed, didn&#8217;t make the Mozilla release notes (though it was included in Firefox 28). Because I feel it&#8217;s a very useful solution, I wanted to bring some attention to it.</p>
<h2>Font Smoothing for [most] Everyone</h2>
<p>In a nutshell, if you&#8217;re using antialiasing for icon fonts and headings using -webkit-font-smoothing, you&#8217;ll want to be aware of -moz-osx-font-smoothing. I won&#8217;t take the time to go into the finer details of sub-pixel or grayscale antialiasing. If you&#8217;re interested, you can read this article about <a href="http://blog.typekit.com/2010/10/15/type-rendering-operating-systems/" target="_blank">type rendering on different operating systems</a> for more info. And though I initially filed the bug on Firefox, the issue is actually OSX. Here&#8217;s a summary from Jonathan Kew (a Mozilla engineer):</p>
<blockquote><p>The &#8220;problem&#8221; in Firefox is simply how OS X renders the font when &#8220;LCD font smoothing&#8221; is enabled (which I think is the default). AIUI, it&#8217;s widely known among the font-design community that OS X tends to fatten glyphs somewhat compared to other rasterizers. For the usual case of black-on-white text, this works OK (though some people like it more than others); however, for white-on-black, the effect can be much too heavy-handed.</p></blockquote>
<p><a href="http://twitter.com/aral/" target="_blank">Aral Balkan</a> posted an excellent example of <a href="http://aralbalkan.com/images/firefox-icon-font-rendering-bug.png" target="_blank">light icon fonts on a dark background</a> — one with -webkit-font-smoothing, one on Firefox. The web has been full of people trying to come up with creative ideas for making their fonts render consistently — opacity tricks, text-shadow tricks, etc. But those only work in some situations. In the end, many people have simply thrown their hands up in frustration—and changed to a different heading font/color scheme or moved away from icon fonts and back to sprites.</p>
<p>A while back, the Webkit team gave us a way to counteract the issue — -webkit-font-smoothing. It should be used responsibly and shouldn&#8217;t be used on everything. Certain fonts become too thin and less legible when it&#8217;s applied. But when needed, it&#8217;s a fontsaver (yeah, yeah, I know). This non-standard property got a lot of attention and caused many of us to accuse Firefox of being fat. I was one of them.</p>
<p>Jump forward to the bug I filed. After much passionate discussion, the exceptional Mozilla engineer <a href="http://twitter.com/davidbaron/" target="_blank">David Baron</a> agreed to grant us a property that provides a similar fix — -moz-osx-font-smoothing. While it has the similar effect of slimming fonts, instead of using the &#8220;antialiased&#8221; value Webkit uses, FFOX has chosen to use &#8220;grayscale&#8221;. (You can read the bug for the reasons why and the methods used.) It also appears from viewing in the FFOX Inspector that you can use the inherit | unset | auto values as well. (Though I haven&#8217;t experimented with those.) So far, anywhere I need the -webkit-font-smoothing:antialiased I now use -moz-osx-font-smoothing:grayscale with great results.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.w3conversions.com/sandbox/font-smoothing/font-smoothing.png" target="_blank"><img style="max-width: 100%;" src="http://www.w3conversions.com/sandbox/font-smoothing/font-smoothing.png" alt="" /></a></p>
<p>If you use Sass, you&#8217;re in luck. <a href="http://twitter.com/firt/" target="_blank">Maximilliano Firtman</a> has created a [Sass mixin to turn the font-smoothing property on and off] (http://maximilianhoffmann.com/posts/better-font-rendering-on-osx).</p>
<p>So spread the news — FFOX is thin again!</p>
<h2>A Sidenote on Bug Filing</h2>
<p>Maybe it&#8217;s all the beta testing I&#8217;ve done over the years, but I come from the &#8220;don&#8217;t accept sub-optimal behavior&#8221; camp. If something in a browser doesn&#8217;t behave as expected, I believe it&#8217;s more productive for the Web and my end result to file a bug and help get it fixed.</p>
<p>For those of you that haven&#8217;t yet filed a bug or made a feature request for a browser, I&#8217;d like to offer a few suggestions I&#8217;ve found helpful:</p>
<ol>
<li>Be very clear in your initial report. Use the most accurate terms you can to illustrate what causes the bug (does it have a trigger, can it be affected by other interactions, etc). Create one or two simple demos that illustrate the bug so the engineers can test it more easily.</li>
<li>Remember that you&#8217;re dealing with people—engineers have feelings (I swear, they do!). Yelling at them, in general, gets you no where fast. Clarity and politeness are the order of the day.</li>
<li>Engineers are dealing with massive amounts of work and they have to prioritize. If they feel your bug is a small edge case, it will receive a lower priority. If your bug is one that affects a myriad of people, but the engineers don&#8217;t understand that, rally the troops to come vote for it and comment on it. Have them show more examples. It really makes a difference in helping them prioritize.</li>
<li>Stay with your bug. Keep an eye on it. Provide more examples where needed. This is your baby, it&#8217;s your responsibility to see it delivered to the masses. It&#8217;s easy for it to accidentally get stuck in limbo where one engineer has worked on it and is waiting for another engineer to weigh in. But he&#8217;s working on other things and doesn&#8217;t know the first engineer is waiting, and — well, you get the picture. The occasional little ping or tickle doesn&#8217;t hurt.</li>
<li>Once the bug is fixed, <strong>you</strong> may be the one that has to let people know. Don&#8217;t count on release notes and the browser&#8217;s dev center. It can be missed in the mass of things that occur in a release.</li>
</ol>
<p>BTW, I have <a href="https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=687311" target="_blank">this other outline bug</a> I&#8217;d love to see fixed. It&#8217;s been around for over three years. It could sure use your votes. <img src='http://blog.w3conversions.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.w3conversions.com/2014/04/font-smoothing-webkit-firefox/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
