Loading Profile...
Typekit works in all modern browsers on Mac, Windows, and Linux, as well as on iOS (4.2 and higher) and Android (2.2 and higher) devices. Typekit does not support Windows 2000 or Mac OS 10.3 and earlier.
While the Typekit font service works on Internet Explorer 6, Opera 10.54+, and many mobile devices, typekit.com does not.
Typekit is not guaranteed to work on beta builds of new browsers, but it often does. Typekit's embed code checks the browser's user agent string in order to send the correct files to that browser; as long as a beta build's user agent string follows the same pattern as previous releases, then Typekit will be enabled on that beta build by default. If the user agent string changes, then it may be a bit of time before we enable it. If you ever have trouble with a specific beta build, let us know at support@typekit.com.
Updated on 7 December 2010.
Help get this topic noticed by sharing it on
Twitter,
Facebook, or email.
Twitter,
Facebook, or email.
-
-
I’m
Informed
Thanks for the clarification. Could you add a section on mobile browser support as well? -
-
I'm using Firefox 3.5.2 in Linux and I get the red bar telling me I'm using an unsupported browser. Here's my browser string: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.1.2) Gecko/20090729 Firefox/3.5.2- view 3 more comments
-
-
-
-
Same, Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686 (x86_64); en-US; rv:1.9.2) Gecko/20100115 Firefox/3.6
-
-
-
-
I’m
not as thrilled as I was 5 minutes ago.
Darn. I wish I would've read that before throwing-down $50.
I was pretty much giddy to throw money at such an awesome project, and after reading that IE5 & later supports @font, I didn't think twice about paying.
Now I'm thinking twice about paying. Not good.-
My message was a lil' hasty. See below...
-
-
-
-
-
I’m
a changed man.
Ok, after ACTUALLY USING the app :-) things are much better.
I did final tweaks to the CSS sans-typekit, so that my fallback would be solid. Of course, this is the obvious thing to do with any JS.
Typekit is just amazing guys. 3 hours later, I'm completely sold.- view 1 more comment
-
-
http://bastian-allgeier.de/css_browse... - this makes it much more amazing... write exact css for unsupported browsers.
-
-
http://bastian-allgeier.de/css_browse... - this makes it much more amazing... write exact css for unsupported browsers.
-
-
-
-
Alan - we should be so lucky to turn around every concerned customers so quickly. Please do send feedback.
-
-
I’m
anxious
Would it be too much to ask to support Google Chrome? It is after all just as capable as Safari (if not moreso...)- view 3 more comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
Agreed.
-
-
-
-
Neko -
While some beta/dev versions of Chrome support @font-face, Chrome does not yet consistently support it. Once it does, Typekit will work in that browser. Until then, you can specify web safe "fallback" fonts for Chrome (and other browsers that don't support @font-face).
For the record: We're eager to support Chrome! -
-
I’m
indifferent
Please stop using browser detection. If you must use some kind of detection, use RENDERING ENGINE detection. Typekit.com thinks that Shiretoko (Firefox 3.5.x's nightlies) and Namoroka (Firefox 3.6.x's nighlies) don't support @font-face when they do. Just parse the Gecko/VERSION_HERE string to see if a Mozilla-based browser supports @font-face. Many browsers are built on top of Gecko and that is why it should be the Gecko version you're checking for not the "Firefox" version.-
I agree seems silly to be on the most cutting edge browser yet see the fallback fonts. I'm running Ubuntu 9.04 and Firefox 3.5.4 (nightly version as its the only real way to get 3.5 on Ubuntu atm) and can't even test my font setups till I get home :¬/
-
-
Wow, so that's the reason it's not working in Firefox... so any user of Ubuntu or Arch Linux etc. will have to rebrand their browsers to see my site... not worth the typekit fee then.
-
-
-
-
-
Elijah - We've talked about that and think it's a good idea. Thanks for the feedback.
- view 7 more comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Oh, wow. I didn't realize it was that recent. Thanks for being the vanguard for @font-face! :)
-
-
Oh, wow. I didn't realize it was that recent. Thanks for being the vanguard for @font-face! :)
-
-
-
-
Hi, why isn't Opera supported? Opera 10 supports @font-face so is there some other reason?-
Hi Rick, I've commented on this question below. This link should take you to my comment. Thanks!
-
-
-
-
-
I’m
confident
Firefox 3.5.3 on Ubuntu Linux. Typekit actually works just fine, but the unsupported browser warning bar still appears. -
-
I’m
frustrated
The Editor works fine yes but you can't preview fonts in your page as they don't display, well they don't on mine or my work machine.
I have to switch to another computer (an ageing G4 mac) just to see if my code is working...annoying seeing as its the same browser on both just the stupid OS check that breaks it. -
-
I’m
not overly impressed
http://dev.opera.com/articles/view/th...
While I understand the urge to be up front about how typekit can be used, browser detection based messages make me sad. Especially when they aren't applicable to me, and haven't been for at least a month. I know it's a pain but if you're going to go to the trouble of listing off what IS supported, then you're pretty much obligated to stay current with browser development.- view 1 more comment
-
-
Using @font-face myself with free fonts like Gentium works fine. It looks like it's a problem with Typekit's encryption or whatever they do to protect the fonts.
-
-
Hi Georgene and LouisC, I've commented on this issue below. This link should take you to my comment. Thanks!
-
-
-
-
I’m
silly for paying $50 so quickly.
is there a timeline on internet explorer? more than one persons that use the internet use IE-
Hi RC Cone,
If you're asking about IE support in the Typekit.com app (where you choose and configure fonts), we don't yet have a specific date for that, but it will be coming sooner rather than later.
If you're asking about IE support in the Typekit font serving service, that is already there: currently, Typekit fonts will work in IE6 and up. If you're seeing a specific problem with Tyepkit fonts on your site in IE6 or up, please contact us at support@smallbatchinc.com, and we'll be more than happy to get to the bottom of the issue.
Thanks! -
-
Thanks Greg!
-
-
-
-
-
I can provide a bit of explanation for those of you wondering about Typekit's support for Opera 10. Typekit currently withholds your specified Typekit fonts from Opera 10 (and instead applies the fallback fonts you specify) because of a few problems in Opera 10's support for @font-face. This includes the problems relating to specifying multiple weights and styles, which Opera mentions here. Opera also states there that they'll be fixing that problem soon, which is great news. We'd love to support Opera, and we'll gladly do so as soon as the problems that cause incompatibility with Typekit are fixed. We're in touch with Opera about these issues, and we'll keep you all posted here.
Thanks for the feedback!- view 5 more comments
-
-
-
-
-
This is not actually true, not all of the characters will render if you do as you suggest. We are looking to support Opera in the future but are not ready to release support for it at this time.
-
-
You're right, although I could have sworn it worked once or twice before... Oh well, thanks for the answer !
-
-
-
-
And, as for Chrome, we'd definitely love to support it as well, but its support for @font-face is not consistent: current builds of Chrome, for example, have @font-face ttf/otf linking disabled. (See this and this for more details.) We'll support it once it consistently has @font-face enabled, and we'll announce that support here.
In the meantime, in Chrome (like Opera), Typekit will apply the fallback fonts you specify, instead of needlessly loading the data for your preferred Typekit fonts.
Thanks for your feedback, everyone! -
-
I’m
pondering
Any updates on the possibility of changing from browser detection to rendering engine detection (mentioned above by Elijah Grey)?
Seems like a good choice and would open Typekit up to a whole load of new users.-
Sounds a good idea to me
-
-
Sounds a good idea to me
-
-
-
-
-
what about iPhone support? or does mobile safari not support font-face -
-
I’m
unsupported
On my tech-focused site, I expect to have a much larger proportion of Linux users than the net-wide average. Most won't be able to see the fonts I just paid to use because TypeKit still uses user-agent checking on the client side.
I'm thrilled about TypeKit, but I can't use it until this is fixed. -
-
Hey folks, me too , I'm getting the redbar with firefox on Linux version ( 3.5.4 )
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.1.4) Gecko/20091028 Ubuntu/9.10 (karmic) Firefox/3.5.4
How do I can fix this?- view 1 more comment
-
-
Right...
-
-
Right...
-
-
-
-
defferent font shows in FF3 and defferent in IE7 (i thin EI7 is the right one)
-
Hi Limuel, can you tell me exactly which version of Firefox 3 you're using? Also, if you can point me to a URL for a page that demonstrates this problem, I'll be happy to take a look.
Thanks for the feedback! -
-
-
-
-
I’m
frustrated
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2b1) Gecko/20091029 Firefox/3.6b1
Red bar showing for me.-
Hi William,
Firefox 3.6 beta should also not be getting the browser warning, so we'll be fixing that soon.
Thanks for the feedback! -
-
-
-
-
I’m
confused
Agree with William, apparently Firefox 3.5 or higher doesn't include pre-release versions of 3.6, getting the red bar saying my browser isn't fully supported.
Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.2b1) Gecko/20091029 Firefox/3.6b1-
Sorry for the confusion, Andrew. We'll be changing the browser detection soon, so that you'll no longer have to see the warning when using Firefox 3.6. Thanks for the feedback!
-
-
-
-
-
Did you see:
http://paulirish.com/2009/bulletproof...
Method Supports Chrome (Pre-V.4).
http://www.fontsquirrel.com/fontface/...
Great font-face builder tool. -
-
Typekit is awesome!
As @tmtstr wrote, Chrome supports @font-face with SVG fonts as of Chrome 0.3+.
See: http://paulirish.com/2009/bulletproof...
Will Typekit soon have SVG fonts to support Chrome?
Not being able to serve Chrome users is a showstopper, because Chrome market share is growing at a good rate and is >5% for some sites.- view 2 more comments
-
-
-
@Alan, Typekit *can* serve Chrome users with SVG fonts, so why not do it? You should, because some sites have >5% visitors with Chrome browser.
Anyway, 'full' @font-face support is coming soon, in Chrome 4, which is good news. And TypeKit is awesome btw. -
-
@Alan, hmmm, if we had to follow Corporate America's lead, we'd still be running IE6 five years from now. Note the latest browser stats: http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/bro... - Chrome was at 8%, and IE6 at 10.6% (cf. Opera at 2.3%). If TypeKit supports IE6, why not add support for Chrome since it's available (not sure why the SVG option would be ignored anyhow, is it a matter of font licensing?).
-
-
-
-
I’m
confused
Is it too much to ask for you to publish a table summarising Typekit support across all common browsers and platforms, on the Typekit site? It's very frustrating to have to amalgamate the complete picture from the comments here and elsewhere around the web.
For an example of why I find the picture confusing, why does Bello Pro render correctly on the typekit.com homepage in IE6 and IE7, but Skolar on forabeautifulweb.com (a site participating in your technology trial) doesn't? Why is Bello Pro on your homepage a background image in Firefox 2 or 3.0? Doesn't it give a misleading impression that those browsers are supported? Does Typekit generate background images if necessary?
I am very keen to start using Typekit, but right now I can't give my clients assurances as to when it'll work and when it won't.- view 3 more comments
-
-
-
-
Yes please. A browser support table would be an excellent addition.
-
-
Thanks for the great feedback, fjordaan!
Excellent idea re: the browser support table. We're definitely going to add more help information to the site, including more details on browser support. This is coming soon.
Re: using an image on our homepage for older browsers, we did that as a special case there because that particular promotional area of the page is as much about showcasing the font itself as it is about showcasing how Typekit works as a service. To that end, whenever we show an image there (for older browsers), we also display some text explaining that the font renders as real text when viewed in a newer browser. Is that text not prominent enough and/or is it not worded clearly? We're totally open to suggestions here.
Re: IE6/7, the Typekit font serving service does in fact work in IE6 and IE7. There are factors that can make Typekit not work on specific sites (for example, the selectors are configured incorrectly, or other CSS on the page that Typekit doesn't control is conflicting with Typekit, etc.). In those cases, we're happy to work with the site's owner to figure out what's wrong and get the service working properly.
Again, thanks for the feedback. Keep it coming! -
-
-
-
-
Typekit does support IE. Are you not seeing that?
-
-
-
-
-
I’m
the missing link
Does it help that much on the S.E.O front? Are Images that bad?? $250 p.a erm.......
-
-
I’m
not sure what's going on
I'm having problems with FF3.5.5 on Mac. Custom fonts disappear after the browser is opened 2nd time. Fonts reappear only after clearing the cache? -
-
any reason (besides its a trial account) that type sometimes renders aliased - Safari 4.0.4? if it IS a trial account thing only, please let me know.
thanks,
Peteski
http://thisisnthappiness.com/- view 1 more comment
-
-
Mac OSX 10.5.8 (PB w/2.6 Ghz Intel core 2 duo)
-
-
and I even on your homepage - the fonts to select list are often aliased
-
-
-
-
I’m
confident but waiting
Hi all,
First of all, thank you developers for bringing up Typekit, it looks like it'll be an awesome system even for putting up already free-fonts on our websites with improved performance! On the other hand I realize it still on it's early days and lots of things need to be fixed for it to be consistently usable.
I read about the many issues with different versions of Firefox (that use the Gecko/Mozilla engine) that are not working with Typekit though they fully support the @font-face declaration and I would like to stress out the same thing with Webkit (read Safari) based browsers.
Great Web/CSS design applications like CSSEdit or Expresso that are based on the Webkit engine and fully support the @font-face declaration don't work with Typekit because of the browser checking issue.
Please use rendering engine Checking if it's needed! :)
One question, why is Browser checking so necessary? If a browser doesn't support @font-face why not let the Browser itself fall back to the next font on the Stack??
Keep up the work it's gonna come out great!- view 3 more comments
-
-
-
-
I would very like to see it work with CSSEdit.
-
-
I would very like to see it work with CSSEdit--and Flock.
-
-
-
-
I’m
sad
The verbiage throughout your site is very misleading as to what is supported and what isn't. Take this page for example: http://getsatisfaction.com/typekit/to...
The first paragraph says, "We plan to support other browsers, including Internet Explorer, in a future release."
While the very next one says, "The Typekit fonts you use on your website will render in most browsers that support the CSS @font-face rule, including Firefox 3.5 and higher, Safari 3.1 and higher, and Internet Explorer 6 and higher."
It's been over three months since comments were posted about switching to rendering engine detection rather than browser based detection and I kept asking myself the same thing over and over while reading through comments... Theo beat me to it:
"One question, why is Browser checking so necessary? If a browser doesn't support @font-face why not let the Browser itself fall back to the next font on the Stack??"
And another comment from fjordaan in another post:
"Is it too much to ask for you to publish a table summarising Typekit support across all common browsers and platforms, on the Typekit site? It's very frustrating to have to amalgamate the complete picture from the comments here and elsewhere around the web."
+1 For both of these. I think if these were both done you would really, really be onto something. The faster your service works as intended in all browsers the faster you'll see success as a company.- view 4 more comments
-
-
-
-
efilson,
Thanks for the great feedback!
See the post below about rendering engine detection that I just published.
As for why we use detection at all to withhold fonts from browsers that can't display them: for browsers other than Internet Explorer, we use data URIs and base-64 encoding to actually embed font data directly into the stylesheet that we dynamically inject into Typekit-enabled pages. This results in fewer http requests than if the stylesheet contained links to multiple font files (and, we believe, makes for a better end user experience). The reason we don't want to just inject this stylesheet for any browser (and let the browser fall back to the next font in the stack) is that then that browser would be downloading a big chunk of data it can't possibly use. This would be a waste of bandwidth for you, our customer, as it would count against your monthly bandwidth limit even though those users wouldn't be seeing your fonts. So, in the end, we're trying to help you get the most efficient use of your Typekit subscription. Does this seem reasonable?
As for your point about the different statements about browser support in the first two paragraphs of our post here: you're right -- they are different. That's because the first paragraph is talking about which browsers our website, Typekit.com, works well in, and the second paragraph is talking about which browsers the Typekit fonts serving service works in. These are different things. One affects visitors to typekit.com; the other affects visitors to your website(s). We're working to narrow this gap soon, however. Does this clarify that point?
And as for a table clearly showing all the browsers/os's that the Typekit font serving service supports: I agree, this is a great idea, and we're going to put that up at typekit.com ASAP.
Thanks again for your feedback! Let us know what you think about this new stuff. -
-
-
-
EMPLOYEE
I’m
excited
I've got a big announcement for those wondering about rendering engine detection:
We've just rolled out an update to our font-serving logic. Now, for Gecko-based browsers such as Firefox, we decide whether to serve Typekit fonts based on rendering engine (i.e., Gecko) rather than browser (i.e., Firefox).
We've also updated the logic to serve Typekit fonts to Chrome. So, if your build of Chrome has @font-face enabled, it will be able to display Typekit fonts.
These changes will allow many more user agents to use Typekit fonts.
The changes are live now, and we're republishing all kits over the next few hours to apply this new behavior to them. To get the changes in your kit immediately, simply republish your kit (using the Publish button in the Kit Editor). Then, just clear your cache and reload to see it in action.
We plan to do rendering engine (rather than browser) detection for Webkit-based browsers soon as well. We'll announce that in this thread when it's available.
Thanks for all the great feedback, folks!- view 5 more comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
Looking forward to font rendering on the iPhone.
-
-
-
-
Hey Greg,
I'm testing now with Google Chrome on a local virtual machine on my mac.
The @font-face declaration works when I use local fonts or when I try to see pages such as http://www.fontsquirrel.com/fontfaced...
But doesn't quite work with Typekit.
It also doesn't work when I try to view a page like but IE doesn't also: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/39519/webfont...
I have Chrome v3.0.195.33 running on Windows XP installation on my mac.
Should this be working at all? Any thoughts?
Just trying to help on debugging...
best,
t.-
Thanks for the report, Theo.
Our detection serves Typekit fonts to Chrome 4.0.249.4 and later, as that is the latest version of Chrome with stable @font-face support. Earlier than that, @font-face was intermittently enabled in Chrome, depending on the build.
@font-face also works in some earlier versions of Chrome in the form of SVG fonts (which may result in unselectable text and other effects).
So, your version of Chrome may be working in your local tests because of one of those two reasons.
Does this clarify? Let me know if you have more questions.
Thanks for the great feedback, too! -
-
-
-
-
-
I’m
mildly annoyed (but it's early here)
Running in Firefox 3.0.15, the TypeKit JS is loading, but obviously the fonts aren't being rendered.
Should browsers that aren't supported still be loading up the JS like this, or do I need to duplicate my font stack in the TypeKit application? (that seems silly).
-Rob -
-
I’m
sad and frustrated.
Let me get this straight - only two browsers are capable of showing the sample preview library of the fonts on offer! That's not exactly a clever way to inspire me to use this system is it? Like the majority of people I wish to view the fonts as a typical user would, with common and last version browsers, not as an up to date techy geek user would. I arrived inspired and left feeling disappointed, not sure whether to even try the free trial.
-
-
I’m
seriously upset
I just spent money on TypeKit only to find that it doesn't work in the browser I use.
-
-
I’m
annoyed
I'm using FF 3.5.6, I get the red bar saying it is not supported! At least I just signed up for a trial and didn't put out any cash
-
-
I am having difficulties using a Windows XP 64 bit operating system on most browsers, even if I have the latest when previewing your Library page it shows the message "You're using a browser that Typekit doesn't yet fully support. Read more..." at top.
I know that Wondows XP64 bit is not very popular and it has some issues with sIFR as well but are you planning on any updates in relation this? -
-
Hi there,
I'm trying out Typekit for the first time and tried the steps shown on: http://typekit.com/help/wordpress, but the fonts are not showing up on my webpage (http://juliofromny.wordpress.com).
I'm currently using the "Andreas09 by Andreas Viklund" theme. Could this theme be the reason the fonts aren't showing, even though the "colophon badge" is showing up with no problem?
Please assist. Thanks -
-
Hi Julio
Looking at your kit I can see you don't have any of the selectors present and so Typekit, though operating, doesn't know what to modify. Here's an excerpt from our Wordpress help page.
"Adding fonts
As you browse around Typekit, you'll see a button labeled "Add" next to each font. If you see a font you'd like to try, just click that button and the Editor will open in a new window. You'll see the font you chose, along with some features that let you control how the font will work on your blog.
Click on the font and open up the Selectors area on the left. Selectors are a term from HTML and CSS that describe how a page is constructed. If you haven't used these technologies before, don't worry -- we'll walk you through it. Let's try now with a simple example: Adding the font you just chose to your blog's headline.
In a new browser window, navigate to one of your blog posts. Once you're there, use your browser's view source feature to see the page code. There will be a lot of code in there, but if you scroll down you'll eventually find your post's headline. Or, it might just be easier to search for the headline text in the source. See the h2 tags around it? That's what you need to enter into the selector area (without the angle brackets, though.) Just type h2 into that form and hit enter."
The idea is to find the HTML tag that surrounds the text you want to change and then enter it in to the Selector Box. If you use your browser's "View Source" command, you'll see a bunch of fairly messy looking code, but if you search for the text of, say, your headline, you should find something like this:
<h1>This is my headline text<h1>
To apply a font, you'd open the Editor in Typekit, select the font you want, and enter "H1" (without the quotes) into the Selector Box. Then click publish and you should see the font in a few moments when reloading your blog. If it still doesn't work, try clearing your browsers cache (usually found in the preferences) and reload again.
Let me know if this helps,
Tej. -
-
-
Our detection serves Typekit fonts to Chrome 4.0.249.4 and later, as that is the latest version of Chrome with stable @font-face support. Earlier than that, @font-face was intermittently enabled in Chrome, depending on the build.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Looks like we have a small bug in the code that generates that red "unsupported browser" banner at the top of the page. We'll fix that ASAP. Note, though, that the fonts are actually rendering, so the problem is just that we're showing that warning banner when we shouldn't. Thanks for pointing it out. Good catch!
-
-
-
-
-
If Firefox is supported, why wouldn't Flock be? Flock is just Firefox with various "social" addenda...-
Flock is indeed based on Firefox, but it's currently based on Firefox 3, which doesn't support @font-face. (The earliest official Firefox version that supports @font-face is Firefox 3.5.) Unfortunately, we can't serve fonts to Flock until it supports @font-face.
More information on the connection between Flock and Firefox is here:
http://www.flock.com/mozilla -
-
-
-
-
-
Update: we replied to that comment. Here's what we said:
---
Just to be clear, the Typekit web app that you use to select your fonts and apply them to your website doesn't currently support Internet Explorer. We focused on making a great experience for web designers and developers, and the majority of them use Firefox, Chrome, or Safari in their day-to-day work. We'll get IE support there soon.
But that's separate from what browsers support @font-face. We serve EOT fonts all the way back to IE5, and support every other browser that implements the technology (with the exception of Opera 10, because of pretty significant bugs in their handling of fonts.) -
-
-
-
-
See http://frdm.fr Good I think. Neat / Windows XP / Firefox 3.5.7 & IE 8 and Safari 4.0.4 & even Chrome 4.0.249.78. Thanks a lot to Typekit... (method : code in css). -
-
I’m
confused
When will you have support for Google's Chrome browser? I'm using Safari 4.0 on a Mac and Google's Chrome on Windows. Chrome is based on the same WebKit engine as Safari so I don't understand the incompatibility.
-
We do support Chrome. Typekit serves fonts to Chrome 4.0.249.4 and later, as that is the latest version of Chrome with stable @font-face support. Earlier than that, @font-face was intermittently enabled in Chrome, depending on the build.
-
-
-
-
-
-
I’m
confused
So I'm confused. You say your service does not support IE but this page shows your font in several IE environments: http://typekit.com/fonts/650
Browser support is a muddy subject that needs some major clarification.
Do you or do you not support IE?-
Greg Veen, (Official Rep), commented 9 days ago
http://goo.gl/L2Vt
Update: we replied to that comment. Here's what we said:
— Just to be clear, the Typekit web app that you use to select your fonts and apply them to your website doesn't currently support Internet Explorer. We focused on making a great experience for web designers and developers, and the majority of them use Firefox, Chrome, or Safari in their day-to-day work. We'll get IE support there soon.
— But that's separate from what browsers support @font-face. We serve EOT fonts all the way back to IE5, and support every other browser that implements the technology (with the exception of Opera 10, because of pretty significant bugs in their handling of fonts.) -
-
-
-
-
I have a problem with the font Athelas.
My OS is Windows XP SP3.
The beautiful Italics of this font show correctly in Firefox, Safari, Chrome.
See :
But Internet Explorer 8 shows Athelas Regular, transformed in italics.
See :
Url of the text :
http://goo.gl/o7QB
François-R.- view 1 more comment
-
-
Thank you for your answer and for the link, the page delivers great explanations.
The next question is presumably... did you consider offering Italics under a different font-family name than the regular "normal" font ?
(Isn't presumably the answer: you rather wait for IE to adapt correctly to the @font-face full features? But is this foreseeable, could this not be true?) -
-
frdm: yes, we've considered offering the ability to make a font's variations accessible as unique font-families. This would be cumbersome to use in practice, though. Example: if you have a paragraph that contains normal, bold, and italic sections of text, you'd then need separate style declarations that apply the bold font family to "strong" and "b" elements and the italic family to "em" and "i" elements. Nevertheless, we may still offer this as an option at some point in the future, as it would be useful for, say, setting an italic headline in true italic in IE.
-
-
-
-
My browser is internet explorer. Do I have to switch to firefox or safari to use this font service? Do my blog readers also need firefox or can they still read my blog if they have internet explorer?
-
-
-
Thanks, frdm. Just so Cindy is sure to see it, I'm going to paste the answer here, too:
— Just to be clear, the Typekit web app that you use to select your fonts and apply them to your website doesn't currently support Internet Explorer. We focused on making a great experience for web designers and developers, and the majority of them use Firefox, Chrome, or Safari in their day-to-day work. We'll get IE support there soon.
— But that's separate from what browsers support @font-face. We serve EOT fonts all the way back to IE5, and support every other browser that implements the technology (with the exception of Opera 10, because of pretty significant bugs in their handling of fonts.) -
-
-
-
-
Sorry, I am very confused. Is there a list soewhere which shows which fonts are supported by Explorer 6 and above?
-
-
-
Thanks, frdm. Just so Cindy is sure to see it, I'm going to paste the answer here, too:
— Just to be clear, the Typekit web app that you use to select your fonts and apply them to your website doesn't currently support Internet Explorer. We focused on making a great experience for web designers and developers, and the majority of them use Firefox, Chrome, or Safari in their day-to-day work. We'll get IE support there soon.
— But that's separate from what browsers support @font-face. We serve EOT fonts all the way back to IE5, and support every other browser that implements the technology (with the exception of Opera 10, because of pretty significant bugs in their handling of fonts.) -
-
-
-
-
How do I get my money back if typekit doesn't work with my browser?
-
Hi Mary, I replied to your support ticket with instructions that explain how to delete your account. Typekit offers a 30-day, money-back guarantee.
-
-
-
-
-
I’m
angry
She's got a point, I think it's understandable for things not to look *exactly* the same in every browser but typekit is a major letdown because it doesn't work in IE which is still 50% of the browsers out there.
Honestly in most instances @font-face looks like a better solution that typekit. It's almost as if the web's not ready for typekit.-
Sorry you're angry AJ! But just to clarify, Typekit isn't a different solution than @font-face; Typekit is a service that makes it easier to use @font-face. And Typekit does work in IE 8/7/6.
-
-
-
-
-
-
We do support Chrome. Typekit serves fonts to Chrome 4.0.249.4 and later, as that is the latest version of Chrome with stable @font-face support. Earlier than that, @font-face was intermittently enabled in Chrome, depending on the build.
-
-
-
-
-
- view 1 more comment
-
-
That's outside of Typekit's control though, as it depends on the WebKit version that CSSEdit is using, unfortunately.
-
-
Greg Veen's explained this in a little more detail in response to a question I posted recently. Shouldn't be hard to find. The ball's in MacRabbit's court, basically.
-
-
-
-
Chrome 5 user reporting in, the browser nag is annoying and unneeded (fonts work great)-
Looking into this now. It's an issue with the logic used to display the "not fully supported" warning bar. We'll have a fix out ASAP. Sorry for the trouble!
-
-
-
-
-
-
Sorry for the trouble, mak! Can you post the URL of a site where you're seeing Typekit not work, along with a list of affected browsers (with version number) and operating systems (with version number)? That will help us diagnose the problem. Thanks!
-
-
-
-
-
I’m
appalled
What? No support for Chrome? I'm appalled. I stopped using Firefox because of all the bugs - slow page loads, constant crashes, freezing my computer, etc. Chrome has been a blessed experience so far. Not a single hiccup. You guys need to add Chrome above Firefox.-
We do support Chrome, version 4.0.249.4 and higher. Are you seeing Typekit fail to work in Chrome?
-
-
-
-
-
I’m
frustrated
Chrome 5.0.307.11 beta, page says "Not fully supported."
Get your act together, Typekit!-
Looking into this now. Fonts are working, so it's only an issue with the logic used to display the "not fully supported" warning bar. We'll have a fix out ASAP. Sorry for the trouble!
-
-
Glad to here's it just an issue with the warning logic. Maybe take a leaf out of jQuery's book and use feature detection instead of user-agent's (if that's what you're doing).
http://api.jquery.com/jQuery.support/ -
-
-
-
-
I’m
positive
I'm using Chromium on Linux and getting the "Not fully supported message". Here's my user agent string:
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US) AppleWebKit/533.3 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/5.0.352.0 Safari/533.3
Hope that helps. -
-
-
I’m
baffled
I am using Firefox 3.6 and it just isn't working. It works on Safari AND on other machines using FF but just not on this machine and on this browser.
Any ideas? I'm stumped.- view 1 more comment
-
-
late as I am in adding this comment - but same here... Typekit never worked in FF (on mac OSX 10.5) for me... Could it be the OS version? or does anyone know of any clashes with FF addons possibly?
-
-
The only addons that I am aware of that currently have issues are NoScript and ad blockers (depending on how they are configured). If you want to send an email to support@typekit.com and include my name I can work with you to resolve your issue with FF on OSX 10.5.
-
-
-
-
I’m
confused
Hi,
I have been checking my pages by using screen shot sites as I work on a mac.
In https://browserlab.adobe.com/ my chosen font (Museo slab) is not showing up in any of the IE's. In http://ipinfo.info/netrenderer/ my chosen font is only displaying in IE 7 & 8.
Why is this? -
-
I’m
sad
i use google chrome as my browser and love it...i would hate to have to not use typekit b/c of this!
thanks so much -
-
I’m
aggravated!
How do I know if IE 7.0.5 supports CSS? I am not able to see Selectors on my WordPress page. -
-
I’m
fine.
When running Safari on Windows XP, League Gothic is showing only a very select amount of characters. ("Reasons for my Redesign" reads as "A O FO Y I").
Not that I really care at this point, since who the hell runs Safari on a PC... but might need looking into. -
-
Also, I don't know why people are complaining about Chrome...
As of 5 minutes ago Typekit is working for me in all of the following:
Windows: Firefox 3.5, Chrome, IE 8/7/6
Mac: Firefox 3.5, Chrome 5.0, Safari 4
The only two browsers that aren't working are Opera and Safari 4 (PC only). -
-
I've noticed that Typekit does not work for me at times when using Mac Chrome for certain websites. I'm currently using version 5.0.342.7 Beta. All characters render out incorrectly on certain websites. Is this something wrong with their JS file? See attached image for a sample of what I see. Again, it's inconsistent.
-
-
I’m
adhd
Epiphany browser is webkit-based, and scores 100/100 on the acid 3 standards support test (something even firefox could not achieve, let alone the dinosaur i.e.8), so I am led to the conclusion that it does in fact support the @font-face rule.
In light of this, it may be that Epiphany browser, despite being a popular browser among linux users, is not on the typekit supported browsers list, despite it having full support of the required standards. could you please amend your list regardin this?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epiphany...
Sincerely, Justin Benjamin, aka th3g1vr -
-
-
-
I’m
annoyed
With "Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.2.5pre) Gecko/20100427 Ubuntu/10.04 (lucid) Namoroka/3.6.5pre", I get told that TypeKit does not yet fully support this browser.
Why are you looking at the brower agent string?-
Just to be clear, you should be able to visit any Typekit enabled site and see properly rendered fonts. The warning you see only concerns http://typekit.com.
We take browser support very seriously, so if we don't routinely test that browser on our site we'll show a warning. That said, in all likelihood everything will probably work fine since you are just using a prerelease version of the next incremental update to Firefox. However if you encounter any issue we strongly recommend you switch to one of the browsers we are able to routinely test.
I hope that helps. -
-
-
-
-
I’m
confused
Hi,
I've Chrome for Mac (latest Dev channel 6.something)
and today I received this messege "You're using a browser that Typekit doesn't yet fully support. Read more..."
Version 6 is higher than version 4 as you said, isnt it? I should't see that message.-
We don't currently support Chrome 6.x because it hasn't been released yet. That said, you should be able to use Chrome 6 with the application, the warning indicates that we aren't able to verify that everything works exactly as expected.
So my advice would to be go ahead and use it but if you encounter an error or something odd, I would suggest using one of the browsers that don't receive that warning. -
-
-
-
-
-
I’m
frustrated
This issue of your implementation of not letting you use the true bold face font in IE makes no sense.
"frdm: yes, we've considered offering the ability to make a font's variations accessible as unique font-families. This would be cumbersome to use in practice, though. Example: if you have a paragraph that contains normal, bold, and italic sections of text, you'd then need separate style declarations that apply the bold font family to "strong" and "b" elements and the italic family to "em" and "i" elements. Nevertheless, we may still offer this as an option at some point in the future, as it would be useful for, say, setting an italic headline in true italic in IE. "
Why is this cumbersome? It should clearly be an option. Without making it an option, you make it impossible to provide any cross-browser consistency when using font weights and styles.
For example, I'm tried to use Meta Web, but I only want the bold font. The font has four variations, and the Kit Editor allows you to select which fonts you want to include when you publish. This should be an easy workaround - just let users publish different selectors which include different sets. But it doesn't even let you publish 1 set that only includes a subset of the weights. If I deselect everything but the bold font, it still does not give the correct bold fold in IE. So this means that the Weights & Styles selector does not really work (for IE). How can your sell this as a reliable cross-browser solution with such a huge shortcoming?
It seems like I'm better off going directly to FontFont and buying web fonts from them, with these nonsensical limitations. -
-
I’m
bemused by betas
strange bug... probably safari more than typekit:
http://www.fashionbuddha.com/html5
(with an ipad)
if you view it horizontally, the bold text shows as bold in the upper 3 'graphs. turn the pad vertically, and the bold turns off.
at first i thought that this was zoom-related, so i zoomed in -- same behavior. crazy! -
-
I’m
annoyed
Could you please consider supporting Firefox 4 betas? Mozilla expects and encourages many people to try them till the release of the final version of the browser (probably at the end of this year).
Every time I go on a website that uses Typekit with my Firefox 4 beta 1, I get fallback fonts.
I use this beta version to test and experiment with new features targeted at Web developers and designers. But, right now, since Typekit thinks I use an unsupported browser, I have to choice between new features or using Web fonts :-/-
We just pushed out support for this. If you republish your kit it should work.
-
-
-
-
-
I’m
peeved like a beaver
Can i say pretty please, and ask for an Opera update?-
Hi Joe, Typekit now works in Opera: http://blog.typekit.com/2010/07/08/ty...
-
-
-
-
-
I’m
wondering about squirels
i should have been more spcecific..... linux opera support i see is still missing... but now i know me and my friend are the only two left affected i'll accept that perhaps you have other things to work on.
-
Ha ha, thanks Joe. We do appreciate your patience. Maybe someday soon Opera will support WOFF. That'd make things easy.
-
-
Actually Joe we recently pushed some changes that should fix this. Can you republish your kit and verify that it works in Opera 10.60 on Linux?
-
-
-
-
-
I’m
contemplating swallows
Hi Matt,
OK, so the fonts look great when i use Opera in Linux to view them in my "kit" on your site, but they fail to load on my site. i republished my kit " Jewel of the Prairie" and it doesn't seem to have helped but look fine in both ff and chrome.-
I tried looking at your site and it just seems to be a parking page at the moment.
If you contact support@typekit.com with the url you are looking at we can figure out what's going on. -
-
-
-
-
I’m
surprised and a bit frustrated
lack of support for firefox 4 betas let alone minefield comes really as a surprise since it's still the best development environment even though webkit browsers make a better defaults these days. Hope you're already working on it- view 3 more comments
-
-
-
-
This should be all fixed up, the issue only affected typekit.com, so any kits using those fonts would have worked.
-
-
I wonder if it's the same problem with Opera 10.70 builds? Everything works okay on my site but for an example http://typekit.com/fonts?style=Sans+S... is not working properly on the first load. However, if I click one of the fonts on the page and after that return to forementioned page, all fonts gets loaded properly.
edit. Almost forgot, this is with Linux builds of Opera so might be just the general Linux+Opera+Typekit thing going on. -
-
-
-
I’m
confused
This page says that Chrome 4+ is supported, but when I use the dev channel builds of Chrome (6.x), it says I'm using a browser that's not fully supported... What gives?-
This is confusing stuff. Here's why.
We want to ensure that people have a flawless experience on typekit.com. That means that we need to test browsers throughly ourselves on the site before we remove that warning. Since the browser space evolves so rapidly it's difficult for us to ensure that the bleeding edge versions of each separate browser work as we expect. If we wait until a browser version is released, we minimize the amount of validation required and still support browsers when users are most likely to adopt them.
All of that said, when we say supported we mean whether users of that browser will see typekit fonts on your page, in which case we do our best to support browsers as they come out. However we aren't perfect as we can't always anticipate what browser vendors will do (in the case of FF4 betas). -
-
-
-
-
I’m
counting my gerbils
If i could make a suggestion, it would be really nice if there are was some sort of compatibility flag that i could pass typekit, so that it would assume it would work with browsers rather than degrading the experience just because you have not been able to find enough gerbils to test my-exotic-browser.
now to make this even better, having a webpage so users could shout that the my-exotic-browser does or does not work would be good.
just my 2c. -
-
Please help.
I'm using Firefox 3.6.8 but when i update my ID [i've cut and paste it and checked i got it right] i just get a blank page?
What am i doing wrong.-
If you can send the url of the site you are working on to support@typekit.com we'll help you figure out what's up.
-
-
-
-
-
I’m
anxious
Firefox 3.6.8 and 3.6.9 under Vista show up as unsupported.
If it helps anyone:
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.9.2.9) Gecko/20100824 Firefox/3.6.9 ( .NET CLR 3.5.30729; .NET4.0C)-
Sorry about that. It looks like we had a mistake in our detection routine on typekit.com (your kits weren't affected). I went ahead and fixed it, so the warning bar should be gone when you visit typekit.com from now on.
-
-
Sorry about that. It looks like we had a mistake in our detection routine on typekit.com (your kits weren't affected). I went ahead and fixed it, so the warning bar should be gone when you visit typekit.com from now on.
-
-
-
-
-
I’m
amused.
Firefox 4 (beta 5), while higher than Firefox 3.5 (as in Firefox 3.5 and higher) is unsupported.
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:2.0b5) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/4.0b5 -
-
I’m
bummed
I'm using Opera 10.63, which is greater than 10.54, but I get the popup saying my browser isn't supported. And sure enough, visiting one of my sites doesn't load the fonts
-
-
I’m
confused
I'm using Firefox 3.6.12 and it says my browser isn't supported. What's going on?-
Hi Jason - Can you please visit this diagnostic page and tell me what it says? http://typekit.com/typecheck/#no-site You can send it to support@typekit.com if you'd prefer to handle this there.
-
-
-
-
-
I’m
sad
umm ✔ Your browser is Opera/9.80 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.6.5; U; en) Presto/2.7.39 Version/11.00
✔ Your referer is sent
✔ Your ip is 24.22.131.46
✔ Fonts checking ...-
Typekit supports Opera, but starting at version 10.54 because of issues with the webfont support in earlier versions of Opera. For more information on our browser/OS support, see this help article:
http://typekit.assistly.com/portal/ar...
Let me know if you have any questions. -
-
-
-
-
-
Oops, sorry, Divya -- I totally misread that user agent string. Well, that's embarrassing.
As for Opera 11: we don't always immediately support new beta versions of browsers, since we need to test their webfont support to see if anything has changed and/or if we can take advantage of any improvements. We'll support Opera 11 just as soon as we've confirmed this. -
-
-
-
-
I’m
wondering
I've been wondering about this procedure - blocking new versions until tested. I'm certain you've discussed it at long in meetings, but I'd like to have a better understanding of the decision...
My first reflex would be to allow minor versions and betas to run with the typekits and block only major version changes.
Blocking minor changes - especially on browsers that update frequently - only means more broken websites.
Blocking betas... well... its beta - why not let it run?
At least, I would've expected an option in the kit to let designers decide.-
We don't block beta builds. Rather, we only send fonts to known user agent strings. If a beta build changes the user agent string to something we haven't seen before, then no fonts will be sent until we update our embed code to recognize that string. The reason for this is that sending fonts to an unknown UA on which there has been no testing can cause unintended consequences. Because web fonts are handled differently by different browsers and OSs, there's simply no way to predict how web fonts will be handled on a new browser build. (Witness the unfortunate crashing bug in iOS 3.X as an example.) We add beta builds as quickly as we can. If there's ever a particular build on which you are having trouble, just drop a line to support@typekit.com.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
I’m
in need of a green juice.
Hey guys,
Hope I'm not late for the party - just to let you know, Typekit is NOT showing up on the latest Chrome version for me at the time of this writing.
Could you advise? The site is blogcreationdomination.com. -
-
Hope this is the right place for me to ask...
I'm trying out typekit for our company in a pre-production environment and I although I have seen the fonts work on IE7 and IE8 on Windows XP yesterday, I am not seeing the fonts work today although it still works on Firefox and Safari.
I have checked the head section of my source in IE8 and I can that the necessary scripts are indeed there:
and if I inspect element on the CSS I can see that it is pointing to the right font-family, however I cannot see the url which points to the src where the IE browser should find the font.
I have tried various different fonts and CSS selectors to no avail, and unless I am missing something blatantly obvious It appears to me there is something wrong with the publishing of the IE script?
Sorry I cannot provide a link as this is not yet on an external environment. But I thought maybe the javascript included above will shed light on the issue.
Thanks.-
I don't know if the issue is in any way related to the face that if I get the link href to the css file which typekit puts in my header and launch it in a new tab, in Mac Firefox I can see the generated CSS but in Windows XP today I seem to get a 403 Forbidden with the corresponding link ref generated in Windows XP.
-
-
-
-
EMPLOYEE
