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

Font Awesome, the pictographic font designed for use with Twitter Bootstrap

fortaweso.me

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 96 posts

Re: Font Awesome, the pictographic font designed for use with Twitter Bootstrap

#81

Post by Grepsy »

fortawesome wrote: post #26
headbiznatch wrote: post #25

I love font icons and these are great. Thanks for sharing. Two notes: 1) When I first started using font icons, I encountered an issue that might be worth sharing - you need to make sure your web server properly handles the more esoteric file types that are included in the @font-face declaration. 2) Paperclip icon!!!! I'm sad when these icon sets are missing this very useful metaphor for "attachment": not "my dog jus…

1) Good catch. I'll look into what's going on there. 2) I like the idea for a paperclip icon. I'll look into adding that into the next version. Watch the repo or follow @FontAweso_me on Twitter to stay apprised of updates.

Tried to follow, but guess that handle should be @fortaweso_me, correct?

Re: Font Awesome, the pictographic font designed for use with Twitter Bootstrap

#82

Post by fortawesome »

hornbaker wrote: post #61

Brilliant. I absolutely love this, and will absolutely use Font Awesome in my next project. While the name Font Awesome is catchy, it doesn't say much about the product, and won't carry seo juice or meaning for your main selling point: better icons. A name like "fonticons" (pronounced like "emoticons") might be stronger, and you could own that term which may go generic (like "kleenex") if the technique is widely adop…

Wow. That's a pretty darn good idea. I'll be in touch.

Re: Font Awesome, the pictographic font designed for use with Twitter Bootstrap

#83

Post by fortawesome »

Grepsy wrote: post #81
fortawesome wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1) Good catch. I'll look into what's going on there. 2) I like the idea for a paperclip icon. I'll look into adding that into the next version. Watch the repo or follow @FontAweso_me on Twitter to stay apprised of updates.

Tried to follow, but guess that handle should be @fortaweso_me, correct?

Hah! Yes it should be. Bad that I'm confusing myself.

Re: Font Awesome, the pictographic font designed for use with Twitter Bootstrap

#84

Post by fortawesome »

cwsaylor wrote: post #37
fortawesome wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nice. Definitely let me know how it goes.

Dropped right in. You can see it here: https://skitch.com/cwsaylor/883te/font-awesome-phonegap To get it looking really good, I'll need to play with the button padding and the font size. This is using mini buttons with large icons. I also noticed that the thumbs up/down next to each other has the optical illusion of not looking centered.

Good call on the thumbs. I'll vertically center it better visually.

Re: Font Awesome, the pictographic font designed for use with Twitter Bootstrap

#85

Post by datagramm »

melvinmt wrote: post #71
rplnt wrote: post #69

I have web fonts disabled (because of abuse by many developers) and this looks like rubbish. Perhaps there is way to fall back to image icons if font is not available?

Good question. What should happen when people also have images disabled (because of abuse by many developers)?

I'm considering disabling text in my browser.

Re: Font Awesome, the pictographic font designed for use with Twitter Bootstrap

#86

Post by drostie »

fortawesome wrote: post #44
dangrossman wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Darn. It's a shame that the icons are the only part of Bootstrap not under the same license. I was hoping this font would change that, but it's going to remain a no-go for commercial sites and apps where the company isn't going to create a "credits" page just to link back to CC-BY licensed stuff. They'll just license Glyphicons instead. In fact, now I'm curious. You took the Glyphicons set and effectively copied it,…

I'm re-considering the license for the font itself. I agree, attribution on a commercial site would not be ideal. Attribution in code, however, seems reasonable. I used the classes from the Glyphicons set for backwards compatibility, but every icon was designed from scratch. If you look closely, you'll notice many of them are quite different.

Are you actually planning to sue people for not providing attribution? If not, you might just want to save yourself the headache by using a more permissive license -- BSD and MIT are popular but if you really like Creative Commons, they have the Zero License:

   https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/
Up to you, though.

Re: Font Awesome, the pictographic font designed for use with Twitter Bootstrap

#87

Post by tnorthcutt »

I don't know if it would make sense for your plans, but have you considered looking into getting fontawesome added to Google's Webfonts collection? That could help drive mass adoption. Here's their submit form: https://services.google.com/fb/forms/submitafont/

Re: Font Awesome, the pictographic font designed for use with Twitter Bootstrap

#88

Post by mdda »

justincormack wrote: post #66
fortawesome wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm re-considering the license for the font itself. I agree, attribution on a commercial site would not be ideal. Attribution in code, however, seems reasonable. I used the classes from the Glyphicons set for backwards compatibility, but every icon was designed from scratch. If you look closely, you'll notice many of them are quite different.

Attribution in code is unworkable if you minify code as it will no longer be there. Coders who are looking that hard will be able to work out where the awsomeness came from. Embrace a sane open source license please, something that would eg allow distribution with Debian.

Minifiers almost always have an option to preserve specially marked comments for precisely this reason (to preserve the license information).

Re: Font Awesome, the pictographic font designed for use with Twitter Bootstrap

#89

Post by kjhughes »

ot wrote: post #73

The icons look great! The font rendering engine is still the cheapest and most convenient way for having small scalable graphics. Note that this trick is as old as Windows 3.1, as Raymond Chen points out in his blog: http://blogs.msdn.com/b/oldnewthing/archive/2012/01/16/10256... (The blog name "Old New Thing" is spot-on as always :) )

And character set graphics (code page 437 from IBM PC http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_page_437, PETSCII from Commodore PET http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PETSCII, etc) predates the Windows technique, albeit without scaling.

Re: Font Awesome, the pictographic font designed for use with Twitter Bootstrap

#90

Post by [deleted] »

drostie wrote: post #86
fortawesome wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm re-considering the license for the font itself. I agree, attribution on a commercial site would not be ideal. Attribution in code, however, seems reasonable. I used the classes from the Glyphicons set for backwards compatibility, but every icon was designed from scratch. If you look closely, you'll notice many of them are quite different.

Are you actually planning to sue people for not providing attribution? If not, you might just want to save yourself the headache by using a more permissive license -- BSD and MIT are popular but if you really like Creative Commons, they have the Zero License: https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ Up to you, though.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN