-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 78.8k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
woff2 in v3.3.2 #15758
Comments
Sounds more like a bug in your MIME type library, no? |
I partially agree with that. My counter argument would be that other library's might not want to support draft functionality. |
The correct mime type for WOFF 2.0 files is hard to determine but from what I've seen: Google uses W3C recommends NGINX: WOFF2 mime type
APACHE: WOFF2 mime type
|
The correct mime type for WOFF 2.0 is hard to determine because no proposal has been accepted by IANA yet as far as I know. |
@mdo Any thoughts here? |
Where? Example? |
@cvrebert Info re: 'Google uses font/woff2' and other interesting stuff on this Gist here: |
Sadly, that Gist doesn't actually give an example of where Google uses it. Given when that Gist was created, it's entirely possible that that portion of it is outdated. |
Ok, go to http://www.google.com/fonts/ and view the Network Inspector in Google Chrome and you'll see type: font/woff2. Google use that type for all Google-hosted fonts. I use WOFF2 fonts on my IIS 7 server but the type shows there as: application/font-woff2 |
Hmm, indeed. Let's see if they'll fix that: https://twitter.com/cvrebert/status/570155277648924672 |
Thanks for linking to that @coliff as that's where I was going |
All my research says to use
So IMHO, there's no serious doubt about the de facto or de jure correct MIME type here. And Bootstrap generally tends not to care about such server-side considerations anyway. So I think that just leaves the matter of "Should we include support for a font format whose standard isn't yet finalized"? I'm personally in favor of simply deferring to our upstream (Glyphicons) and trusting their judgment; they've apparently chosen to include WOFF2. CC: @twbs/team so we can make a final up-or-down decision here. |
I'm fine leaving the WOFF2 in there if it's not causing any harm and makes us a bit more future-friendly. |
It is still a little bit early for woff2 but being that we just follow upstream, I'm OK with including it too. MIME types isn't something we need to care IMO. |
Closing this then. |
After downloading version 3.3.2 of bootstrap I noticed that if you using latest chrome or ff browser woff2 fonts are used. This is causing a problem for our application stack. The s3 bucket where our deployed client code lives is pushed from a travis build. The travis build is unable to determine the MIME type for woff2. Ruby MIME Types
Is there any real need to include
woff2
as at the moment it is still in draft?The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: