Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Icons – Google Fonts

fonts.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 190 posts

Re: Icons – Google Fonts

#161

Post by dragonwriter »

ilogik wrote: post #17
throwaway3699 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You'd prefer Google throw them under a proprietary license instead of asking nicely?

y...yes? they should use an appropriate license

Not every undesirable behavior can be blocked by firm rules without catching non-problematic behavior. Using a license which that errs on the side of being permissive rather than restrictive at the boundary and using social pressure to try to mitigate undesirable behavior in that boundary area seems a reasonable approach. (True for law, too, and lots of other domains.)

There's some domains where you need to (given that perfect calibration is unattainable) err on the side of being restrictive, but that's definitely not always the right choice.

Re: Icons – Google Fonts

#162

Post by dragonwriter »

jfoster wrote: post #26
ilogik wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

y...yes? they should use an appropriate license

It's incredible that one of the biggest companies in the world can't manage to appropriately license their stuff. Apache 2.0 is also a strange license for anything that's not code, too; it refers to "source" and "object" form throughout. I imagine they could've chosen it for license simplicity & compatibility reasons, but again, if they just wanted these to be used as widely as possible, they could've just gone CC0.

> Apache 2.0 is also a strange license for anything that's not code, too; it refers to "source" and "object" form throughout.

Fonts are code. And very often have a clear source vs. object form.

Re: Icons – Google Fonts

#163

Post by charcircuit »

matsemann wrote: post #59
charcircuit wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I design websites that are to be used with primarily desktop screens. If you want to use an unsupported configuration such as a tiny screen or with no screen then it is not my fault if it does not work well. Similarly, if I make a VR game I am not going to design it in a way that makes creating a pancake version of the game easier to use. If someone does create a pancake mod for the game, they should not complain abo…

> I design websites that are to be used with primarily desktop screens. If you want to use an unsupported configuration such as a tiny screen or with no screen then it is not my fault if it does not work well. In lots of countries you are obliged to make the site accessible for what you call "unsupported configurations". E.g screen readers, heavily zoomed sites etc. So yes, it will be your fault, and you are liable f…

Sure, throw me in jail for not wanting to waste my time developing stuff I have no use for in websites that are freely accessible. If countries want me to develop and support stuff that I don't want to they should pay me for it.

Re: Icons – Google Fonts

#164

Post by crazygringo »

bckygldstn wrote: post #123
crazygringo wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the one hand, I absolutely agree with you. I tremendously lament the fact that outline, color, and shading have been thrown out so now we're trying to decipher little rounded-box hieroglyphics based on lines being subtly different. But on the other hand, the problem is that icons took so much work to create before, and also because they had such a recognizable identity/brand they weren't easy to reuse. Now the ico…

FYI there is a setting in gmail that turns the mystery icons into text labels: https://support.google.com/mail/answer/2473038?hl=en-GB

Wow it never even occurred to me there would be a setting for that.

Thanks!!

Re: Icons – Google Fonts

#165

Post by charcircuit »

Kaze404 wrote: post #69
charcircuit wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I design websites that are to be used with primarily desktop screens. If you want to use an unsupported configuration such as a tiny screen or with no screen then it is not my fault if it does not work well. Similarly, if I make a VR game I am not going to design it in a way that makes creating a pancake version of the game easier to use. If someone does create a pancake mod for the game, they should not complain abo…

Ticket: "Your website isn't very accessible to people using screen readers. Could you improve it with aria tags please?" Response: "It's not my fault you're blind. Ticket closed."

No, my response is that your screen reader sucks. For example a bad screen reader might require that an image of an apple has to be labelled apple for it to work, but a good one could just see that image and recognize that it is a picture of an apple.

Re: Icons – Google Fonts

#166

Post by erulabs »

SebastianKra wrote: post #159
systemvoltage wrote: post #102

I am sorry but I am going to be that guy. Iconography has regressed so much, it's all the same optically to me. Designers keep pushing minimalism and line-graphics to "reduce crud" like its some sort of a religion. We can't distinguish icons well. There is no effort put into making them more unique and recognizable. What a horrible cult. Check out these glorious past remnants that we've forgotten about, they were so…

What is it with HN being so hostile towards design? So many smart designers are carefully considering how to make genuinely ideal interfaces. But fuck them, they're just too lazy to put effort into complex interfaces, they're just following trends. They don't know what there doing. But Winamp-Themes where you can barely even see the buttons - yes, those are great. Sure, mistakes are made, and overcorrections happen.…

It's sort of the default state of assumption about the world in my opinion. "Everyone is an idiot except me" makes the world incredibly simple - frustrating, but simple. "Other people are incredibly bright and talented" is a scarier thought at a first look, plus it's vastly more complex because then the second question: "Why are there still problems in the world" arises instantly.

Personally I think it's wildly comforting and explanatory to assume other people (typically) know better than I do. Means I can focus on my little corner of the world and I don't need to tear it all down and rebuild it. Design, fashion, modern art; there are loads of domains engineers tend to assume are full of idiots - and yet we don't seem to dominate them like you'd assume we would if they were, indeed, full of idiots.

Re: Icons – Google Fonts

#167

Post by duckmysick »

systemvoltage wrote: post #126
duckmysick wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Apart from HN UI, pretty much every website and desktop app has wastage of space. By HN, do you mean Hacker News? Because it has whitespace on the sides (since the element has width of 85%). It still looks fine if you change it to 90 or 95, so one could argue there's wasted space there too. But I'm not that one. I recognize empty space has its place in design. And it's not a fad either. Pick up a book - any book -…

Books have a purpose for negative space on either side of the text. It's to allow you to hold it without obscuring the text. It is also to allow spine to be tightly bound. For reference, here is a good book that goes in-depth of what and whys of book design, it is hard to find it though: https://www.amazon.com/Designing-Books-Practice-Jost-Hochuli... Most negative space on the websites is merely designers going "it l…

It's not just for the practical purpose. Jan Tschichold writes: "Two constants reign over the proportions of a well made book: the hand and the eye." Indeed, large margins give a feeling of quality, luxury, and openness. Compare older books with spacious margins to tight ones in modern books so as much text can be crammed to save on printing.

Here's another reference about page margins: https://practicaltypography.com/page-margins.html

"The pleasure of reading an effectively designed document will soon outweigh the unfamiliarity of extra white space around the edges."

Re: Icons – Google Fonts

#168

Post by charcircuit »

reaperducer wrote: post #98
charcircuit wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I design websites that are to be used with primarily desktop screens. If you want to use an unsupported configuration such as a tiny screen or with no screen then it is not my fault if it does not work well. Similarly, if I make a VR game I am not going to design it in a way that makes creating a pancake version of the game easier to use. If someone does create a pancake mod for the game, they should not complain abo…

I design websites that are to be used with primarily desktop screens. If you want to use an unsupported configuration such as a tiny screen or with no screen then it is not my fault if it does not work well. It's good that you're this steadfast in your righteousness. That way you know why so many businesses don't consider hiring you.

I make websites in my free time for fun. I don't find it fun spending time developing and testing for configurations that I won't personally use. I have better things to do in my life than fiddle with CSS.

Re: Icons – Google Fonts

#169

Post by avereveard »

this looks like it's very early beta. lots of the outlined icon are filled, and lots of the icon change shape proportions dramatically between the different kind, say, filled and rounded, making it impossible to use the stiles together like you could with font awesome

Re: Icons – Google Fonts

#170

Post by ashneo76 »

systemvoltage wrote: post #102

I am sorry but I am going to be that guy. Iconography has regressed so much, it's all the same optically to me. Designers keep pushing minimalism and line-graphics to "reduce crud" like its some sort of a religion. We can't distinguish icons well. There is no effort put into making them more unique and recognizable. What a horrible cult. Check out these glorious past remnants that we've forgotten about, they were so…

I am going to heavily agree. The current set of useless garbage is not different from the next. And any and all creativeness is sirens in copying and being like apple and google.

The flat abstractions are garbage that only a selected few understand. Instead of being a language that is representative of something, literally the meaning of "icon", it is a flat 2d projections of a 3d shape in a 2 color scheme.

A floppy disk became the icon for saving because it represented "write to disk". Now, it would be a square in the name of flat ness and easy to read or some other optimization. This is not to be conflated with survivorship bias.

Post reply on HN