I wonder what is the best way to load fonts from Google Fonts. I googled and founded <link/>
way better than @import
. Are there any tools to measure speed and performance over network and browser? What about javascript method?
<link href='http://fonts.googleapis.com/css?family=Oswald:300' rel='stylesheet' type='text/css'>
or
@import url(http://fonts.googleapis.com/css?family=Oswald:300);
or
<script type="text/javascript">
WebFontConfig = {
google: { families: [ 'Oswald:300:latin' ] }
};
(function() {
var wf = document.createElement('script');
wf.src = ('https:' == document.location.protocol ? 'https' : 'http') +
'://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/webfont/1/webfont.js';
wf.type = 'text/javascript';
wf.async = 'true';
var s = document.getElementsByTagName('script')[0];
s.parentNode.insertBefore(wf, s);
})(); </script>
Should I use <link> or @import ? # Loading Google fonts in the HTML reduces the critical request depth and speeds up page load Always import your fonts from HTML, not CSS.
Google Fonts can be loaded through Javascript using the Web Font Loader Library. However Google Fonts can be loaded using JavaScript also. This is done using the Web Font Loader Javascript library.
CSS files support web fonts basically in every browser by naming the font-family declaring the source file. The best way is for me is to include it into my . css file and linking it into my header.
<link>
is preferred to @import
, as it doesn't block parallel downloads. See this link for more details: http://www.stevesouders.com/blog/2009/04/09/dont-use-import/
If the fonts you want to use are static and served by Google, the JavaScript solution is probably worse off performance-wise than both <link>
and @import
, since it has to load an external script (//ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/webfont/1/webfont.js
) which then, after what I can see, injects the same link element you could just put directly in your HTML source.
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With