OK, here is a comparison of the advantages and disadvantages of OTF, TTF, WOFF and WOFF2 formats and common scenarios:
- Support for advanced typographic features (such as small caps, ligatures, etc.) <br> - Better cross-platform compatibility <br> - Support for PostScript and TrueType outlines
- The file size is relatively large <br> - Some older software and operating systems may not support
High-quality printing and design work, desktop application
TTF
- Widely supported <br> - Small file size <br> - Good compatibility
- Does not support some advanced typography features <br> - May not be as clear as OTF when printed at high resolutions
Standard font file format for desktop and mobile devices
WOFF
- Designed for web <br> - Smaller file size after compression <br> - Supports metadata <br> - Good cross-browser compatibility
- The compression algorithm is older, and the file size is slightly larger than WOFF2 <br> - Mainly used for web pages, the printing quality is not as good as OTF and TTF
Web font embedding to improve web page loading time
WOFF2
- Higher compression ratio, smaller file size <br> - Designed for web <br> - Faster loading time <br> - Metadata support
- A newer format, some older browsers may not support <br> - Mainly used for web pages, not as good as OTF and TTF in printing
Embed web fonts to optimize web performance
Common scenarios:
Web fonts: WOFF2 > WOFF
Desktop application: TTF > OTF
Advanced typesetting and high-quality printing: OTF > TTF