Ciao Jeremy & TonyM I think SVG is good. Its very flexible.
But I kinda think *we need more icon sets *to address the need for icons beyond the core set. I had thought about assembling a set of 200 that would would overwrite the core set and add more. Why? Consistent style is hard to achieve so even though adding new icons is relatively easy its not so easy to add and maintain a consistent visual style across them all unless they from one author. At the moment we don't, as far as I know, have any alternate sets? So Tony, I think your issue might look different if we had such sets? Thoughts TT On Saturday, 4 April 2020 10:33:25 UTC+2, Jeremy Ruston wrote: > > Hi Tony > > It’s too late to change the interpretation of the icon field without > breaking backwards compatibility. > > Icon fonts like fontawesome are actually now somewhat controversial, and > aren't recommended for contemporary web development: > > https://cloudfour.com/thinks/seriously-dont-use-icon-fonts/ > > https://www.lambdatest.com/blog/its-2019-lets-end-the-debate-on-icon-fonts-vs-svg-icons/ > https://css-tricks.com/icon-fonts-vs-svg/ > > There are quite a few repositories of SVG icons that work very well with > TW5. For example: > > https://thenounproject.com/ > https://www.flaticon.com/ > > Best wishes > > Jeremy. > > On 4 Apr 2020, at 00:48, TonyM <[email protected] <javascript:>> wrote: > > Folks, > > I am always at a loss for icons especially for buttons but also elsewhere. > > - The Recently update FontAwesome is an example of a good source > - There are also hundreds of special characters available such as HTML > entities > - > > ☎ 9742 260E BLACK TELEPHONE > > - We have the icon field that allows us to add svg and bitmaps to > tiddlers > > What I am wondering is could we refactor the icon mechanism to not only > accept tiddlernames but also allow > fontawesome macros or html entities to be provided? > > eg; > > - `<fa-lbadge glyph:"fa-font-awesome-flag" fam:"fab">>` > - ☎ > > It should be easy insofar as there can be triggers such as &# or #x or > `<fa` > The trickiest part may be ensuring correct size. > CSS for Icons may also be helpful > > *Why?* > > Because the icon field promises by its generic naming to offer such a > feature and we could do with ready access to a larger range of Icons > > Regards > Tony > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "TiddlyWikiDev" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected] <javascript:>. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywikidev/99c02712-84a8-4118-b665-1f5681d08acb%40googlegroups.com > > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywikidev/99c02712-84a8-4118-b665-1f5681d08acb%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TiddlyWikiDev" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywikidev/f2977576-6bc2-46eb-8799-5a317d619ecb%40googlegroups.com.
