Seems like a lot of people don't like the namespaces changes. I actually really like this! I suppose it's cumbersome even if you're building a project where you have full control. Then again - come on, we're talking about search&replace for 10 minutes here. And in more complex projects, you should have had a flexible function to handle icons anyways.
Why I really, really like it: If you're building something in a namespace polluted environment (say, a component for a popular CMS), this is a damn god-send.
I was on the fence before, from now on, it's fontawesome all the way for all my projects. They've done an amazing job so far and I'm looking forward to what they will do next.
What I see on that page: one hell of a lot of unicode placeholders and not much else.
We don't all agree with a site's font choices.
And at least img made an attempt at semantic meaning and accessibility with alt= attributes. The failure modes for img are actually quite good. There's no such concern in the minds of those who gave birth to icon fonts.
Same here( "a lot of unicode placeholders" ). Can anyone clarify what would make these visible with Firefox 24 on Windows? (Same result for me with Iceweasel, but it's a few versions behind)
The site says JS is not required, and turning it on didn't help. FF 24 is just about the latest. What browser is this intended for?
370 icons is nice, but what i really want is a tool that lets me put together a smaller subset from multiple icon fonts that only has what my app needs. A global font-icon library from which to assemble this subset would be ideal.
These collections are trying to cater to everyone by growing in size when the better solution here is a modularizer.
Icomoon is great, I've been using it for a while now. I find it's pretty easy to create my own icons in inkscape and then upload them to icomoon and add them to my custom icon font.
What i would add to this: this tool has to be command-line tool. Ideally: declare the names of the icons you are using in some sort of a config file and build a font/svgs/images for all of them
They renamed the icons. They don't just break apps when they do that, they break users. At some point things like the names of icons should be frozen. I love Font Awesome of course. But please!
Actually, it's because I originally matched the Glyphicons names. I was never crazy about them and they weren't terribly consistent. Tried to solve much of that in this version.
As much as I like having them for my projects (but I see no reason to get v4 instead of keeping v3), still no temperature (thermometer) nor sparklines (graph.)
I don't know why it is. A spark-like graph is useful for many use-cases (graph or bars? plot this, draw lines), and even more a thermometer-like icon (weather, medicine.) The thermometer has been hanging around the issues for a while also (or so I think from last time I checked.) I'd like to have all my icons in one basket, and I like the look of Font Awesome's. So missing these 2 is a little aesthetic pain.
I can't tell you how happy I am they changed this. No more icon-* conflicts. I've had issues with duplicates with bootstrap's built-in when I only want certain icons to be glyphs, or if I want to create my own. I actually had to do an override where only objects with icon-* and a css class of font-icon would render from the font.
It'll take a little bit of work to update, but I definitely think it's better for compatibility-sake.
If you're looking for good looking icon fonts, don't forget to check out Entypo as well(http://entypo.com/). Not as many options as Font Awesome, but they do look really good/much better than other free alternatives or even paid ones.
I can create my own font file with icomoon so it only contains the icons that I needed for my site. Only issue I have is that there is no way to save the created font file so that I can modify later.
It's different. Icomoon is brilliant for creating a preset group of icons which will be used in a predictable way. But sometimes, especially during prototyping, you don't know which icons you'll want. Just being able to include a pretty thorough library which renders consistently and gives you a decent level of control is a nice weight off your mind. It would be nice to have a subsetting tool, but imo that's what Icomoon's for.
Btw, you can save fonts in Icomoon - just click on the save icon in the bottom right and it'll save a settings json file which can be reimported.
As far as I know they use the fontforge engine (as it is scriptable from the commandline) to drive icomoon, it is very easy to load the fontfile you created with icomoon into fontforge, load another instance of fontforge with a new fontfile created on icomoon and do copy/paste between them.
Of course you can also load the original fontfiles that icomoon works with and use them into fontforge.
I wish they post a link to the previous version's icons page, most of my websites are using font awesome v3, and I dont see a way to quickly find an old icon classes right now, unless somebody can help me out with that?
I love Font Awesome though I do not understand why they have to claim "The iconic font designed for Bootstrap" --- I have managed to use Font Aweome with Zurb Foundation and SASS and it works just fine.
It was designed for Bootstrap in the sense that it originally served as a drop-in webfont replacement for the image-based icons in Bootstrap. Bootstrap had <i class="icon-bookmark">, and adding FontAwesome just made that render as a font glyph instead of an image with no extra work.
"Designed for" isn't "requires". It was designed to be compatible with Bootstrap, but that doesn't preclude it from playing nice with other frameworks.
Bootstrap is crazy popular and people know about it enough that they understand that "designed for Bootstrap" usually means "you can hack it to fit your stuff".
Fair enough. Originally there was quite a bit of CSS to get it to play nice with Bootstrap. Now, it should have more compatibility across the board with all frameworks.
It doesn't have the 10 new version 4 FA icons yet - but you can add any svg based icon you want, or any icon from one of the many other free sets they have.
We use Font Awesome and have been incredibly happy. We augment the set with our own SVGs and appropriately attributed ones from The Noun Project. There are a variety of scripts and web sites available for packaging SVGs up so that they can be used as a font.
We've been seeing as high as 30% in webkit. Hoping to write the findings up. It's especially hard as pretty much every browser has killed off their CSS profiler.
Btw, is there a cheatsheet for those of us using FA3 still? Or are all the old icons interchangeable with "fa-" and "icon-"?
Yes there is: http://fontawesome.io/3.2.1/
I think they're referring to an article that made the rounds a few days ago (can't remember which) that decried the requirement of Adobe Illustrator for participation (citing as evidence the ratio of icon requests vs pull requests).
Why I really, really like it: If you're building something in a namespace polluted environment (say, a component for a popular CMS), this is a damn god-send.
I was on the fence before, from now on, it's fontawesome all the way for all my projects. They've done an amazing job so far and I'm looking forward to what they will do next.