Is there any difference between these two structures?
With http://
@font-face {
font-family: 'nexa-boldregular';
src: url('http://example.com/fonts/nexa_bold_webfont.eot');
src: url('http://example.com/fonts/nexa_bold_webfont.eot?#iefix') format('embedded-opentype'), url('http://example.com/fonts//nexa_bold_webfont.woff') format('woff'), url('http://example.com/fonts//nexa_bold_webfont.ttf') format('truetype'), url('http://example.com/fonts//nexa_bold_webfont.svg#nexa_boldregular') format('svg');
font-weight: normal;
font-style: normal;
}
Without http://
@font-face {
font-family: 'nexa-boldregular';
src: url('//example.com/fonts/nexa_bold_webfont.eot');
src: url('//example.com/fonts/nexa_bold_webfont.eot?#iefix') format('embedded-opentype'), url('//example.com/fonts//nexa_bold_webfont.woff') format('woff'), url('//example.com/fonts//nexa_bold_webfont.ttf') format('truetype'), url('//example.com/fonts//nexa_bold_webfont.svg#nexa_boldregular') format('svg');
font-weight: normal;
font-style: normal;
}
If so, please explain.
Also: it appears from my testing that Chrome can read either one of these structures but Firefox cannot.