Font MIME types following RFC 8081

[LeoColomb]

Recent changes introduced by the RFC 8081 and registered at IANA.

Current	New
application/x-font-ttf	font/ttf
font/opentype	font/otf
application/font-woff	font/woff
application/font-woff2	font/woff2
application/x-font-ttf (ttc)	font/collection

[mathiasbynens]

Which browsers support these MIME types?

Update: This thread answers it: jshttp/mime-db#77

[LeoColomb]

At least the latest version of modern browsers, but this is hard to say except not being able to produce an error.
That said, browsers usually ignore the font media types and simply sniff the bytes to figure out the font type.

Also, as an example, Google Fonts already use these "new" types:

$ curl -I https://fonts.gstatic.com/s/lato/v13/9k-RPmcnxYEPm8CNFsH2gg.woff

HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Accept-Ranges: bytes
Content-Type: font/woff
[...]

Extracted from Lato served for IE

$ curl -I https://fonts.gstatic.com/s/lato/v13/UyBMtLsHKBKXelqf4x7VRQ.woff2

HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Accept-Ranges: bytes
Content-Type: font/woff2
[...]

Extracted from Lato served for Chrome

[LeoColomb]

This is a very good link, thanks!

But this seems to be kind a vicious circle: if everyone wait to the other be updated, no one will do.
Most of the time it can be understandable to avoid errors and breaking things, but in our case the worst thing this change could raise is a notice in some old browsers. 🤔

Isn't it? What is your opinion?
🙂

[mathiasbynens]

Yeah, I agree this should be merged! Could you please take a look at the CI failure?

[mathiasbynens]

Any reason why font/sfnt is not added?

[LeoColomb]

Could you please take a look at the CI failure?

Builds fail since trusty for all builds on Travis: sudo is required for some scripts but not granted. .travis.yml may be updated. See #115.

Any reason why font/sfnt is not added?

Yes, because font/sfnt is a general case for both font/otf and font/ttf, see https://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types/font/sfnt:

Note that "font/sfnt" is an abstract type from which the (widely
used in practice) "font/ttf" and "font/otf" types are conceptually
derived. Use of "font/sfnt" is likely to be rare in practice, and
might be confined to:

• Uncommon combinations such as "font/sfnt; layout=sil" that do not have a shorter type

• Cases where a new parameter value is registered

• Test cases, experimentation, etc.

[LeoColomb]

Rebased.

[mathiasbynens]

👍

[XhmikosR]

@LeoColomb: Shouldn't we remove the old types completely?

[LeoColomb]

I would keep them for compatibility as software may force them.
But that said, I don't know at all.