Re: CSS3 @font-face / EOT Fonts - new compromise proposal

On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 1:55 PM, Philip TAYLOR (Ret'd)
<P.Taylor@rhul.ac.uk>wrote:

>
>
> Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
>
>
>> I'm very reluctant to point to any directly, simply because the possible
>> examples are so numerous and it's so easy to reject particular fonts as "not
>> high-quality enough".  Just do a search for them - there's tons of free
>> fonts out there, and many are of nice quality.
>>
>
> Yes, there are tons of free fonts out there.  But
> in the absence of any concrete examples, I am
> afraid there is little or no evidence that many
> are of professional quality, although to a
> non-critical eye some may well qualify as "nice".


Well, that's another issue making me reluctant to point any out - I know
that I don't have a critical eye in this subject.  Thus it's fairly likely
that I'll point out something which is merely "nice" and have my point
dismissed out-of-hand.  I simply don't know what qualities a font must
possess to qualify as "professional", nor am I willing to put in the time to
crash-course myself and then search for fonts that satisfy this.  I *do*
know that there are many which I am glad to use for my own purposes, and
that I'd love to have available for webdesign purposes.

I also suspect that there qualities that would mark a font as "professional"
which are largely irrelevant to making a font "useful" or "nice".  Thus I
doubt that an exhaustive search for "professional" free fonts, even had I
the skills to make it, would actually be useful here.

~TJ