# Chapter 4. Fonts

**URL:** <https://discuss.httparchive.org/t/chapter-4-fonts/2040>\
**Category:** 2020 Web Almanac\
**Created:** [October 25, 2020, 11:11pm UTC](https://discuss.httparchive.org/t/chapter-4-fonts/2040 "2020-10-25T23:11:43Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 2\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![rviscomi](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex035/user_avatar/discuss.httparchive.org/rviscomi/32/835_2.png) [@rviscomi](https://discuss.httparchive.org/u/rviscomi)\
**Post date:** [October 25, 2020, 11:11pm UTC](https://discuss.httparchive.org/t/chapter-4-fonts/2040/1 "2020-10-25T23:11:43Z")

</div>

# Tell us what you think!

We’d love to hear your feedback on the [Fonts chapter](https://almanac.httparchive.org/en/2020/fonts) of the 2020 Web Almanac. Leave a comment and tell us your questions, comments, and ideas.

_Poll ([view on site](https://discuss.httparchive.org/t/chapter-4-fonts/2040/1))_

## Chapter resources 🤓

Here are some additional resources if you’d like to learn more about how this chapter was made:

- [💡 Planning issue](https://github.com/HTTPArchive/almanac.httparchive.org/issues/902)
- [📝 Draft document](https://docs.google.com/document/d/15-rYqS-FqKWD0_32LdajEg0tD1Tm0KzgTYyLF2pQK8M/edit?usp=sharing)
- [🔎 Analysis queries](https://github.com/HTTPArchive/almanac.httparchive.org/tree/main/sql/2020/fonts)
- [📊 Analysis results](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1jjvZqYay5KmTle4atzFWqtbkz9ohw25KFmNtCS-7n3s/edit#gid=2077755325)

## Found a bug? 🐛

[File an issue](https://github.com/HTTPArchive/almanac.httparchive.org/issues/new?assignees=jpamental&labels=bug%2C+writing&template=2020-content-issue.md&title=Issue+with+the+2020+Fonts+chapter) or submit a pull request on GitHub. Thanks for your help!

## Join us! 🌱

The Web Almanac was built with the support of [over 100 contributors](https://almanac.httparchive.org/en/2020/contributors) from the web community. If you’d like to contribute to the 2021 edition, please fill out our [interest form](https://forms.gle/xDeiLMh1XHHL6LM8A) and we’ll reach out to you in mid-2021.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![tunetheweb](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex035/user_avatar/discuss.httparchive.org/tunetheweb/32/1671_2.png) [@tunetheweb](https://discuss.httparchive.org/u/tunetheweb)\
**Post date:** [January 21, 2021, 5:33pm UTC](https://discuss.httparchive.org/t/chapter-4-fonts/2040/2 "2021-01-21T17:33:02Z")

</div>

Something worth considering for next year is [this Twitter conversation](https://twitter.com/tunetheweb/status/1352302663602483202?s=20):

Querying HTTPArchive it seems the problem is real. 2.2% of sites (155k sites!) request the EXACT SAME font in WOFF and WOFF2 format 😮

However, often WOFF2 fails so tries WOFF after. So no double download, but still bad for perf.

1% of sites do a full double download of both.

| | mobile(abs) | desktop(abs) | mobile(%) | desktop(%) |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Downloads same font as WOFF and WOFF2 | 155,541 | 132,044 | 2.17% | 2.19% |
| Downloads same font as WOFF and WOFF2(both return status 200) | 69,805 | 59,387 | 0.97% | 0.99% |

Data and Queries: [WOFF and WOFF2 double downloads - Google Sheets](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wquKjkjNlgvu9kNz580Bpr8n0BB0xmKdJWnCqgt_w10/edit#gid=1696451362)