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

Say hello to Octicons

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 140 posts

Re: Say hello to Octicons

#21

Post by pak »

I appreciate that these will scale better than images, but I never grokked the icons in the top right corner. To me, a repository isn't much like a "book", and I still remember hunting for the "log out" link in frustration before realizing it was the door with an arrow. Since you've pretty much pegged the header at ~900px wide, I still think text links would be more usable and you have the horizontal room for it.

That being said, since it seems like you're incorporating these metaphors into other parts of the site--like I notice the book icon by the repo name now--maybe the metaphors will eventually stick. But in the meanwhile it has been a little confusing.

Re: Say hello to Octicons

#22

Post by agwa »

untog wrote: post #19
agwa wrote: post #11

I have Firefox configured to force the same font face across all sites (I love the consistency this gives me, and also some some sites are extremely abusive in their font selection) so this doesn't work for me. The "icons" show up as unknown Unicode characters. Not cool. This seems like the wrong approach - shouldn't characters have semantic meaning? It also doesn't seem accessible. Screen readers wouldn't know what…

tags at least have the alt attribute. And tags have the title attribute.

has the title attribute too, but title is meant for displaying additional information via a tooltip. alt is for alternative text to be used in place of the image.

Does any screen reader actually read the value of a title attribute on a link containing text? I doubt it. Instead it would descend into the tag and try to read the text therein.

Re: Say hello to Octicons

#23

Post by pak »

xbryanx wrote: post #3

The file view icons seem way too washed out. I'd like more visual contrast so that I can see what is a folder and what is a file. Not all of us have 20 something eyeballs duders.

Agreed, color is the most immediately recognizable thing about an object and this is just as bad as when Lion washed out the folder colors. It looks more minimalist/modern but is less usable. Even low-saturation colors would be nice. You could do this with font icons just by printing them in slightly different colors (like a terminal, sigh).

Edit: I could be nuts, but they are printing in slightly different colors now, whereas just an hour ago they were all gray. Somebody at github just made my day.

Re: Say hello to Octicons

#24

Post by lloeki »

brcrth wrote: post #15
agwa wrote: post #11

I have Firefox configured to force the same font face across all sites (I love the consistency this gives me, and also some some sites are extremely abusive in their font selection) so this doesn't work for me. The "icons" show up as unknown Unicode characters. Not cool. This seems like the wrong approach - shouldn't characters have semantic meaning? It also doesn't seem accessible. Screen readers wouldn't know what…

So you force a behavior through your browser but when it doesn't work you blame the site? Ok...

Unicode code points do have names and standardized meanings, so it's not a good idea to abuse them.

Hopefully the 'create' one uses f003, which apparently lies in PRIVATE_USE_AREA [0]

    .mini-icon.create::before {
       content: "\f003";
    }
[0] http://www.fileformat.info/info/unicode/char/f003/index.htm

Re: Say hello to Octicons

#25

Post by Pewpewarrows »

jonursenbach wrote: post #14
huhtenberg wrote: post #7

Good idea, but, sorry, don't like 'em. Neither the execution nor the conceptualization. The execution is too detailed. Details, regardless of how pixel-perfect they are, do blur upon quick glance, and the more details there are, the more it looks like a gray blob. The execution is also inconsistent - why the book is 3D, but the rest is flat? Except for the coffee mug that is neither. The conceptualization is off too.…

FWIW, the icons you have problems with have always been in use on Github.

No, they haven't. GitHub only recently changed their top toolbar layout to include those icons, and today expanded them with even more indistinguishable-at-a-glance ones.

Re: Say hello to Octicons

#27

Post by ori_b »

brcrth wrote: post #15
agwa wrote: post #11

I have Firefox configured to force the same font face across all sites (I love the consistency this gives me, and also some some sites are extremely abusive in their font selection) so this doesn't work for me. The "icons" show up as unknown Unicode characters. Not cool. This seems like the wrong approach - shouldn't characters have semantic meaning? It also doesn't seem accessible. Screen readers wouldn't know what…

So you force a behavior through your browser but when it doesn't work you blame the site? Ok...

The alternative is having sites select fonts that hurt my eyes. I want a consistent experience across the web.

Re: Say hello to Octicons

#28

Post by AznHisoka »

huhtenberg wrote: post #7

Good idea, but, sorry, don't like 'em. Neither the execution nor the conceptualization. The execution is too detailed. Details, regardless of how pixel-perfect they are, do blur upon quick glance, and the more details there are, the more it looks like a gray blob. The execution is also inconsistent - why the book is 3D, but the rest is flat? Except for the coffee mug that is neither. The conceptualization is off too.…

I don't like em either, but they're giving me free icons I can use for my website, so I'm all good!

Re: Say hello to Octicons

#29

Post by huhtenberg »

ori_b wrote: post #27
brcrth wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you force a behavior through your browser but when it doesn't work you blame the site? Ok...

The alternative is having sites select fonts that hurt my eyes. I want a consistent experience across the web.

That's like wanting all cars on the road to be red :)

Re: Say hello to Octicons

#30

Post by kijin »

huhtenberg wrote: post #7

Good idea, but, sorry, don't like 'em. Neither the execution nor the conceptualization. The execution is too detailed. Details, regardless of how pixel-perfect they are, do blur upon quick glance, and the more details there are, the more it looks like a gray blob. The execution is also inconsistent - why the book is 3D, but the rest is flat? Except for the coffee mug that is neither. The conceptualization is off too.…

Completely agreed. The icons are not only excessively detailed for their small size, but also sit rather awkwardly in relation to the rounded-rectangle container. The top right corner of every Github page now looks like the notification area of an old Linux desktop with an amateur-designed theme.

Every minor redesign Github has released over the last couple of years increasingly reek of "designed by programmers". But Github deserves better than that. Please get real designers.

Post reply on HN