SVG vs DFONT: Complete Format Comparison
Comprehensive comparison of SVG and DFONT formats covering failed web experiment versus Mac-only desktop, different purposes and platforms, and why both should be avoided
In Simple Terms
Both are legacy/obsolete formats. SVG fonts (0% browser support, removed 2018) failed due to XML bloat. DFONT (macOS-only) is legacy container.SVG fonts never worked well. DFONT works on Mac only—no Windows/Linux/web support. Both should be converted to modern formats.Convert to modern standards: SVG → remove immediately. DFONT → TTF (cross-platform desktop) or WOFF2 (web). Use OTF/TTF for desktop, WOFF2 for web.
In this article
SVG fonts and DFONT (Data Fork Font) represent two fundamentally different font technologies that both suffer from severe platform limitations, with SVG fonts being a completely failed web font experiment using XML text encoding (0% browser support as of 2025) and DFONT being Apple's Mac-only desktop container that works exclusively on macOS. SVG fonts, introduced in SVG 1.1 specification (2001), encode glyphs as verbose XML text within SVG documents, resulting in catastrophic file sizes 289% larger than WOFF (350 KB vs 90 KB) with slow XML parsing, no hinting support, and complete browser rejection—Chrome removed support in 2013, Safari iOS in 2018. DFONT, created by Apple in 2001 during Mac OS X transition, stores TrueType data in Unix-compatible data fork format for macOS desktop installation only, with zero web compatibility and no support on Windows, Linux, or mobile platforms.
The critical distinction is purpose and failure mode: SVG fonts were designed for web but failed completely due to technical incompetence (XML bloat, terrible performance, no hinting), while DFONT was designed for Mac desktop and succeeds in that narrow context but fails everywhere else due to platform lock-in. As of 2025, SVG fonts have 0% browser support and are completely obsolete for all purposes. DFONT remains functional on macOS but is a legacy format that limits interoperability—modern macOS fully supports standard OTF/TTF files, making DFONT unnecessary. Both formats demonstrate critical problems: SVG fonts show what happens when technical design is catastrophically flawed, and DFONT shows what happens when platform-specific solutions prevent universal adoption.
This guide compares SVG fonts and DFONT to clarify their different failures and why both should be replaced with modern standards. You'll learn the technical specifications showing SVG's XML disaster versus DFONT's Mac-only structure, use cases demonstrating why SVG is obsolete and DFONT is limited, platform compatibility showing both formats' severe restrictions, historical context explaining their creation and current status, and definitive recommendations to use WOFF2/WOFF for web and OTF/TTF for desktop. Whether removing obsolete web fonts or managing Mac font libraries, this guide provides essential knowledge about two formats that exemplify technical failure and platform lock-in.
Format Overview
SVG Font Format
History and Purpose:
- • Introduced in SVG 1.1 (2001)
- • Experimental web font using XML
- • Brief Safari iOS use (2008-2018)
- • Never achieved mainstream adoption
- • Obsolete: 0% browser support
Technical Characteristics:
- • XML text format with verbose markup
- • 289% larger than WOFF (350 KB vs 90 KB)
- • Slow XML parsing + SVG rendering
- • No hinting support
- • Extension: .svg
Current Status (2025):
- • Zero browser support (removed)
- • Failed: technical incompetence
- • Use case: None (remove immediately)
DFONT (Data Fork Font)
History and Purpose:
- • Created by Apple (2001) for Mac OS X
- • Transition from Classic Mac resource forks
- • Designed for desktop installation only
- • Never intended for web
- • Legacy: Mac-only limitation
Technical Characteristics:
- • Contains TrueType data in data fork
- • Uncompressed binary format
- • macOS-specific file structure
- • File size: ~150-300 KB
- • Extension: .dfont
Current Status (2025):
- • Works on macOS desktop only
- • Legacy format
- • Use case: Legacy Mac systems only
Different Problems, Same Result
- SVG fonts: Web format, technical failure (XML bloat), 0% support
- DFONT: Desktop format, platform lock-in (Mac only), limited utility
- Neither work on web: SVG removed, DFONT never supported
- Modern solution: WOFF2/WOFF (web), OTF/TTF (desktop, universal)
Technical Differences
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Feature | SVG | DFONT |
|---|---|---|
| Creator | W3C SVG (2001) | Apple (2001) |
| Purpose | Web font delivery | Desktop installation |
| Data Format | XML text (verbose) | Binary (TrueType) |
| Compression | None | None |
| File Size | ~350 KB (bloated) | ~150-300 KB |
| Web Compatible | Was (0% now) | Never |
| Desktop Install | No | Yes (macOS) |
| Cross-Platform | No | No |
| Status | Obsolete (0%) | Legacy (Mac) |
SVG Fonts' Catastrophic Flaws
- Massive bloat: 350 KB vs 90 KB WOFF (289% larger)
- XML overhead: Tags/attributes add 100-200% size
- Slow parsing: XML inherently slower than binary
- No hinting: Terrible quality at small sizes
- Browser rejection: Chrome removed 2013, complete failure
DFONT Platform Lock-In
- macOS only: Cannot install on Windows/Linux
- No web support: Browsers don't recognize DFONT
- Data fork structure: macOS-specific file system
- Limited utility: Modern macOS prefers OTF/TTF
Use Cases and Context
Never Use SVG Fonts:
- • Zero support: 0% browsers, completely removed
- • Worst performance: 289% larger, catastrophically slow
- • No advantages: Inferior in every way
- • Action: Remove all references immediately
DFONT Limited Use:
- • Legacy Mac systems: Old applications from 2001-2010
- • System fonts: Some bundled Apple fonts
- • Archives: Old Mac font collections
- • Action: Convert to OTF/TTF for universal compatibility
Modern Alternatives:
- • Web: WOFF2 (primary) + WOFF (fallback), 99%+
- • Desktop: OTF/TTF, all platforms
- • Result: Universal compatibility
Platform Compatibility
Platform Support Matrix
| Platform | SVG | DFONT |
|---|---|---|
| Web Browsers (All) | ✗ (0%) | ✗ |
| Windows Desktop | ✗ | ✗ |
| macOS Desktop | ✗ | ✓ |
| Linux Desktop | ✗ | ✗ |
| Mobile | ✗ | ✗ |
Historical Context
Timeline
- 2001: SVG 1.1 introduces SVG fonts, Apple creates DFONT
- 2008-2018: Safari iOS briefly supports SVG fonts
- 2009: WOFF created as proper web standard
- 2012: WOFF becomes W3C standard
- 2013: Chrome removes SVG fonts (poor performance)
- 2016: W3C deprecates SVG fonts
- 2018: Safari removes SVG fonts
- 2025: SVG 0%, DFONT Mac-only legacy
Why Both Failed
- • SVG fonts: Technical incompetence, XML bloat fatal
- • DFONT: Platform lock-in prevents universal adoption
- • Open standards won: WOFF/OTF succeeded through collaboration
Modern Recommendations
Use Universal Formats:
- • Web: WOFF2 + WOFF, 99%+ coverage
- • Desktop: OTF/TTF, all platforms
- • Result: Universal compatibility
Never Use SVG or DFONT:
- • SVG: 0% support, obsolete
- • DFONT: Mac-only, convert to OTF/TTF
- • Action: Remove SVG, convert DFONT
Migration Checklist
- ☐ Remove all SVG font references
- ☐ Delete .svg font files
- ☐ Convert DFONT to OTF/TTF (FontForge)
- ☐ Use OTF/TTF for desktop
- ☐ Convert to WOFF2 + WOFF for web
- ☐ Test all target platforms
Summary: SVG vs DFONT
SVG fonts and DFONT represent different failures in font technology. SVG fonts (W3C 2001) failed as web format due to technical incompetence—XML bloat producing 350 KB files (289% larger than WOFF), slow parsing, no hinting, resulting in 0% browser support. DFONT (Apple 2001) is Mac-only desktop container with zero web or cross-platform compatibility. Both demonstrate critical problems—SVG shows technical failure, DFONT shows platform lock-in. Use WOFF2/WOFF for web (99%+) and OTF/TTF for desktop (universal). Remove all SVG references immediately. Convert DFONT to OTF/TTF for interoperability.
Written & Verified by
Sarah Mitchell
Product Designer, Font Specialist
SVG vs DFONT FAQs
Common questions answered about this font format comparison