Would the old method of a bunch of small png files in a directory work much better, now that HTTP/2 is here?
They also just bought an icon design studio, Symbolset, and include many of their icons in the Fort Awesome icon selector: https://symbolset.com/
My favorite workflow is grabbing an svg icon from Noun Project, modifying it in Illustrator until it suits my needs, copying it (Cmd + C), and pasting it directly into the Fort Awesome import box.
This has all the benefits of generating svgs on your own with very little downside. It's saved me a lot of time and it makes turning an app design into a finished product a much faster process.
In light of what I said, why is SVG support "Pro" feature?
(And the SVG font file format automatically flips the icons. So you'd need to invert. TOTALLY doable, if with a good bit of effort.)
I'm not sure why an icon font would be easier to use than SVGs. Yes, you only have to reference a file once (the font file), but that actually makes it more difficult to use, because now you have to remember two things: how to reference the file, and how to reference the icon.
With SVG, it's simpler, because everything is usually contained in one CSS rule. Yes, it has a reference to a file, but does that matter from the viewpoint of simplicity? I.e., make another icon? Then just copy a CSS rule and edit it.
Also, using an icon font makes it difficult to substitute a single icon by another icon. Suddenly, you have to start rearranging your CSS. With SVGs not so: just edit the referenced url.
Anyway, I love the font-awesome graphics. Except for a few icons, such as icons containing people (they look too bulky and inelegant, for my taste). But most icon-sets don't get people-icons right.
(I know for some folks they just like having all their static assets in one place so there's just a single point of failure.)
I parse my CSS file (I embed content:"\f..." strings instead of fa-... classes) to see what I'm actually using and then hack up the font file to only include those characters.
The how is a little technical but I've gone through it here: http://askubuntu.com/q/557980/449
And it's definitely worth it. Most of my sites' FA files are under 2KB.
Ping me over email and I'll make an intro. Amazingly talented and honestly my favorite human beings I've met in the past month. CANNOT recommend them highly enough.
Though still well done.
1) it's FA and looks alright as it is
2) can't beat free, so I don't need to worry about licenses for every single web project
A completely redesigned, larger, commercial library might be interesting, but it is a new project and has practically nothing to do with FA 4.
Been jonesing to start over for a while. Super excited.
Still no answer. Am I the only one that cares that the current state of FontAwesome encourages tying your email address (via a unique token) to your site's specific FontAwesome usage?
https://www.bootstrapcdn.com/fontawesome/ isn't going anywhere anytime soon.
(Also, 4.7 was released today with 41 new icons. If you had one of our unqiue CDN links, you'd be able to upgrade without pushing any code.)
Some of the icons themselves represent something of a universal language for websites. Using those symbols in a typeface is similar in some ways to character based languages like Japanese or Chinese. So I might argue that icons as fonts are quite an appropriate use.
But then there was IE9 mobile, which didn't support @font-face. I remember coding detection for that, and creating a script that automatically generates png versions and the required CSS of the glyphs in use. Sigh.
This one's a classic: https://github.com/FortAwesome/Font-Awesome/issues/1958
Also, there are too many unnecessary brand icons (e.g. skyatlas? houzz? most people aren't gonna use those).
Donated $5 anyways.
And you're right. It is a bit neglected. That's why we're re-doing everything. :)
Oh, and the icons aren't that consistent. It happens over time as you do 40-ish icons per release. It wanders a bit and you lose consistency.
We're fixing all that.
I wonder, is traditional incremental versioning appropriate for what users perceive as a 100% stylistic change (notwithstanding the immense effort of a full rewrite of its internals). Do you intend to enhance Font Awesome 4 after the release of 5, or is 4 going to be EOL?
Coders have learned that it's best to not touch the default font size, or resize html/body font size. The ugly 62.5% (16-->10px) is also dying out for accessibility reasons.
I really like that icon category though. We'll add it to the potential stretch goal icon category packs.
There are some security apps a family member is working on, and having some more related icons would help make his app better. We were talking about it this morning, and then this post arrived.
(Seriously, those mugs are going to be awesome. Enamelware lasts forever and we found this fantastic place to make them. They'll probably outlast me.)
Already have a huge start on things.
Also the option to commission your own icon is really exciting! :-)
And Font Awesome 5 Free will be pretty awesome too. Your pick.
Ping me offline. We'll get you something for the open source project you're happy with where you can use Pro.
1. Using Kickstarter as a way to give PRO users a discount on their normal $40 rate.
2. Using Kickstarter as a way to market/announce their new business model.
If that's indeed why they are doing this as a Kickstarter then its a pretty great way to use Kickstarter, imho!
I'm not sure exactly which mix of benefits FA has in mind, but personally, I don't mind it.
And currently, they've gotten well over double their original goal - which is huge validation that the market likes what they are doing.
That's not to say there is something wrong with it. It just seems confusing at face value.
I'm not really sure why the idea is such a foreign concept to the point where you need to insinuate that I think that Free software "falls from the sky" or some such nonsense.
That's a new one. How does someone getting making a living while developing open source software mean "everybody loses"?
You can, however, do it as a function of your work for your employer. Almost all of today's viable FOSS started like this, because it provides the financial security and moral support you need to bring a FOSS to maturity.
Good thing they're selling a product then, not asking for a handout. And hey, as a bonus, they're releasing a fully refreshed set of icons for free!
Your perspective on what open-source can/should be is utterly unrecognizable to me. I'm glad it seems like the majority of people are finally getting comfortable with the idea that you shouldn't have to choose between making a living and contributing to the open source ecosystem.
I'm sure they don't need to do that but if you've already got the following to allow it, why not take the opportunity to ramp up the buzz?
It also puts some focus on the much-ignored professional versions. Most people have been happy to use the free versions. This draws attention to the fact that designing things takes time and that is worth something.
They need to choose between:
1) If you're gonna raise money, then release all your work for free. No "premium" icons.
2) If you're gonna have a freemium-premium model, then don't have a fundraiser and get others to underwrite your risks.
The business model
-- Edit: not trying to be sarcastic or blaming anyone. I'm saying what I feel about Font-Awesome. If you don't like my thoughts, you just have to live with that. As a member of the community, I guess I also have rights to ask for something, which I do, and I guess I also have all the rights to talk about something that I've been waiting for, for a long time.
Thanks for the downvotes. I hope you can ever understand what was written in the future before downvoting it.
In FA5 we're adding a good number more brand icons. Entirely possible they make it in.
Thanks for providing the motivation, random entitled community member! =)
Now I just need to figure out what to get with the new, custom icon reward...
Yes, you do. You can also ask for it in a reasonable way instead of being a dick, which led to the downvotes in combination with your excessive arrogance in the edits. This isn't that hard to figure out.