-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3.7k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Add New Material Design Icons to its own region #773
Conversation
I am always a bit in fear when fonts originate from webfont people. As they often do not care about codepoints and codepoint consistency (they reference glyphs by name, rather). I examined 3 releases: 3.4.93, 4.6.95, 6.1.95 and they all differ slightly (apart from the switch to And then individual glyphs are replaced all over now and then, Notes become Cooking Pot, No Entry becomes No PianoKeys, Flower Pot? becomes Flag With Star ... just in the few glyphs shown above. So ... is this really a basis to use? Edit: Highlight changed icons in screeenshot |
Maybe I'm too skeptic with the random changes in the comment above. I could not find any changes in more recent versions. Possibly they underwent some restructuring. What I do not like too much, but that is personal, is that the svg-to-ttf is hidden in a npm thing, but I wanted to check how they keep the glyph codepoints constant. But when I read npm, my eyes glaze over and I suddenly loose all interest.) |
MaterialDesign has a With a little jq-foo:
But it seems like they manage their repo using external tools, so, yeah, valid concerns. |
Scrolling through all the glyphs... Maybe one ('old style') New Note: The old style Edit: Add note |
|
Thanks for this (and the other 772) PR. There is still some unsolved problem with the Edit: Ah I already mentioned it here: #773 (comment) |
Note to self: Is the cheat sheet rendering still ok with 5 digit codes? Edit: It is. |
Rebase on master, force push |
(As expected) scaling broken, refer same glyphs in comment above Introducing |
[why] In some cases only some ScaleRule glyphs are used. [how] Store mixture of integers and ranges for ScaleGlyph (as is done for ScaleGroups). Correctly evaluate mixture of integers and ranges. [note] Came up with PR #773 Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <[email protected]>
Pulled bugfix 05a9ec8 already to master. Rebase, force push. |
With appropriate codepoint (fix ryanoasis#365)
Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <[email protected]>
[why] We want to differentiate between the old, problematic Material Design Icons (problematic because we map them to unicode blocks that we should not), and a future new and updated set of Material Design Icons. Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <[email protected]>
[why] Material Design Icons has grown quite a bit. [how] Add the icons at their original position which is in PUA1. Use the desktop font instead of the webfont. Add cheat cheat file. Fixes: ryanoasis#365 Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <[email protected]>
[why] The files sizes of otf files are (especially with the addition of the current Material Design Icons) big enough already. The autohints are not really useful for symbols, so we can drop them and save some space. Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <[email protected]>
[why] ScaleGlyph always did scaling only (no translation) based on one reference glyph. ScaleGroups does scaling and translation but can not work with one reference glyph but constructs always a combined bounding box. Missing is a way to scale AND translate, but with only one reference glyph. [how] Invent GlyphsToScale+ keyword, that supports just that. Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <[email protected]>
[why] Scaling the glyphs individually breaks a lot of glyph pairs or groups, for example F0718-F071E. [how] Use one ScaleGlyph for the complete set. The set itself is already very well scaled, i.e. all glyphs are maximized in a given design space and that they look good next to pairing glyphs. There is no need to use ScaleRules which is quite costly for such a big range of glyphs (they all are copied twice in the process). Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <[email protected]>
Rebase on master, force push. |
This seems to be stuck: Templarian/MaterialDesign-Font#9 So we might need to fix it on our own. |
[why] The glyph 0xF1522 is broken. See: ryanoasis#773 (comment) Templarian/MaterialDesign-Font#9 [how] Manually edit in fontforge and remove line. Export as simple ttf. Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <[email protected]>
[why] In some cases only some ScaleRule glyphs are used. [how] Store mixture of integers and ranges for ScaleGlyph (as is done for ScaleGroups). Correctly evaluate mixture of integers and ranges. [note] Came up with PR ryanoasis#773 Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <[email protected]>
[why] The glyph 0xF1522 is broken. See: ryanoasis#773 (comment) Templarian/MaterialDesign-Font#9 [how] Manually edit in fontforge and remove line. Export as simple ttf. Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <[email protected]>
Add New Material Design Icons to its own region
Description
This is an alternative to #772 . It's part of "Plan 5" Plus in #365. (another part would be to remove the old icons when we make the breaking change).
Requirements / Checklist
What does this Pull Request (PR) do?
Add the updated material design icons in its canonical location.
How should this be manually tested?
Any background context you can provide?
What are the relevant tickets (if any)?
Fixes #365
and Fixes #279
But it doesn't make any breaking changes, so this can be merged before the 3.0 release
Screenshots (if appropriate or helpful)