adam's grump of the day: icons in fonts (was Re: web-assets-httpd stuck in limbo?)
mclasen at redhat.com
Thu Jan 16 15:52:09 UTC 2014
On Wed, 2014-01-15 at 22:31 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Wed, 2014-01-15 at 22:59 -0700, T.C. Hollingsworth wrote:
> > * Another individual thought that all web authors are stupid for
> > wanting to use fancy fonts and that I am wasting my time. (He might
> > be right about that last bit... :-P)
> While we're doing asides, that one *does* get right on my nerves.
> If anyone overrides font choices in their browser config and wonders why
> an increasing number of sites - inc. github, and the wordpress admin
> interface - seem to display weird hieroglyphs all over the place, it's
> because of this "clever trick": web designers have decided that it's a
> really good idea to abuse font rendering engines as a way to render
> icons, and starting shipping icons as made-up Unicode codepoints in
> their sites' custom fonts. If you override their font choice, then of
> course these icons wind up as garbage, because your font does not have
> them, because ICONS AREN'T FUCKING TEXT CHARACTERS, web designers.
It makes a lot of sense, actually. At least the symbolic icons that have
become prevalent in our uis share a lot of characteristics with text,
and can benefit from getting the same treatment as glyphs.
We've been discussing this as an option for rendering symbolic icons in
More information about the devel