In Brave (Chromium based) the extension loads fonts with moz-extension: URLs, failing

[Siderite]

In Brave (Chromium based) the extension loads fonts with moz-extension: URLs, failing:

Refused to load the font 'moz-extension://epgnobcgnmchnhgkgpedebbmhbblfcob/fonts/RedHatText-Regular.ttf' because it violates the following Content Security Policy directive: "font-src 'self' lichess1.org".

[kieferro]

Thanks for pointing that out, but that's simply because the extension needs to work for both Firefox and Chrome, and trying to load the Firefox variant fails in Chromium-based browsers. However, this should not change anything about the functionality.

I guess there should also be a way to unify this. Is the message somehow annoying or is there a limitation in functionality? Otherwise, you can just ignore it.

[Siderite]

I am working on an extension as well and I have dev tools open all the time. And I see those errors, I think they're mine :D It doesn't affect functionality, but it is the only error in the console. BTW, great work on the extension.

[kieferro]

And I see those errors, I think they're mine :D

I see 😄. I will see if I can do something about that without breaking anything.

BTW, great work on the extension.

Thanks, glad you like it.

[LofhJann]

This issue is also present in Google Chrome (up-to-date version "Version 114.0.5735.134 (Official Build) (64-bit)")

Nothing's breaking but 8 error logs load up on every refresh.

Cleanest way could be splitting the extension to 2 different releases for Mozilla and Chrome respectively having their own releases with only necessary files. This would make maintenance more fuzz but would enable making small browser specific fixes that aren't possible without writing if-spaghetti in current form. Maybe even split browser specific stuff from styles.css to child-styles.css files and have github actions build them on published versions?

EDIT: Upon little investigation seems that Chrome and Firefox both support unified format for loading local fonts as used in my PR below. Leaving this comment here in any case since should further cross-browser problems arise splitting to two releases would still be worth considering in future

[kieferro]

@LofhJann Yes, maybe at some point we have to split the versions. But in any case where it can be avoided (and your PR shows that this is such a case - thanks), I would like to avoid it.