Body: <p>I am testing some of the Google free fonts for embedding in epub files (following directions from <a href="https://github.com/JayPanoz/Soma/wiki/How-to-embed-fonts" rel="nofollow noreferrer">this article</a>): </p>
  
  <p>The downloadable fonts are TTF, but the <a href="http://www.idpf.org/epub/301/spec/epub-contentdocs.html#sec-css-fonts" rel="nofollow noreferrer">epub 3 spec says</a>: </p>
  
  <blockquote>
    <p>Reading Systems with a CSS Viewport must support OpenType [OpenType] and
    WOFF [WOFF] fonts embedded using the @font-face rule.</p>
  </blockquote>
  
  <p>This suggests that OTF is better/more reliable, but this  article --written by a fairly informed individual -- is recommending TTF (especially for Kindles). </p>
  
  <p>So my question is: 1)does converting ttf to otf create bloat or artefacts which might justify just including the TTFs without converting them? and 2)Has anyone noticed different levels of support for TTF or OTF in various reading systems? </p>
  
  <p>Thanks. </p>
  
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2017-04-26T15:11:28.080Z
Comments.Text: According to Wikipedia, OpenType is a successor format to TrueType, and .otf and .ttf are both accepted file formats of the OpenType standard; thus, reccomending to use an OpenType font doesn't necessarily means to use a specific file format.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Sekhemty
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2017-04-27T16:55:31.973Z
Comments.Text: Thanks, this is actually news to me. I thought OpenType was equivalent to OTF!
Comments.UserDisplayName: idiotprogrammer
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2017-04-27T17:40:51.750Z
Comments.Text: It was news even to me, I learned it while gathering info. Anyway I haven't read the whole epub specification, so you might want to double check if the two formats are considered interchangeable in this context.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Sekhemty
Tags: <epub><fonts>
Title: .OTF vs. .TTF for embedding fonts in epub/kindle reading systems: which is better?
UserDisplayName: idiotprogrammer
ThreadText: # .OTF vs. .TTF for embedding fonts in epub/kindle reading systems: which is better?
  
  (Asked by: username_0 on 2017-04-26)
  
  I am testing some of the Google free fonts for embedding in epub files (following directions from [this article](https://github.com/JayPanoz/Soma/wiki/How-to-embed-fonts)):
  
  The downloadable fonts are TTF, but the [epub 3 spec says](http://www.idpf.org/epub/301/spec/epub-contentdocs.html#sec-css-fonts):
  
  > Reading Systems with a CSS Viewport must support OpenType [OpenType] and
  > WOFF [WOFF] fonts embedded using the @font-face rule.
  
  This suggests that OTF is better/more reliable, but this article --written by a fairly informed individual -- is recommending TTF (especially for Kindles).
  
  So my question is: 1)does converting ttf to otf create bloat or artefacts which might justify just including the TTFs without converting them? and 2)Has anyone noticed different levels of support for TTF or OTF in various reading systems?
  
  Thanks.
  
  **Tags:** epub, fonts
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_1**: According to Wikipedia, OpenType is a successor format to TrueType, and .otf and .ttf are both accepted file formats of the OpenType standard; thus, reccomending to use an OpenType font doesn't necessarily means to use a specific file format.  
  > **username_0**: Thanks, this is actually news to me. I thought OpenType was equivalent to OTF!  
  > **username_1**: It was news even to me, I learned it while gathering info. Anyway I haven't read the whole epub specification, so you might want to double check if the two formats are considered interchangeable in this context.  
  
  ---
  
  ## 0 answers
  
  