Last modified: 2014-09-10 05:18:31 UTC
To ask a stupid question - are there accessibility concerns in regards to using a font like this to replace icons in the interface?
Not a stupid question at all. I think the element that holds the character should still have some kind of descriptor or "alt-text" the same way the container holding the image would. Each container would need a Title element (aria?) the same way the element would have if it was an raster, vector, or font.
Change 137888 had a related patch set uploaded by Prtksxna:
Add wikifont to core
Is there a guideline/documentation about how to use this in RTL context?
There's a Commons logo in the font, which is copyrighted by the WMF. Is that ok to include in core?
Also, is there an advantage to distributing this as a font versus individual images?
(In reply to Kunal Mehta (Legoktm) from comment #5)
> There's a Commons logo in the font, which is copyrighted by the WMF. Is that
> ok to include in core?
/me would go with no. Also besides the copyright concerns, that seems a violation of the principle that stuff in core should be generic
(In reply to Bawolff (Brian Wolff) from comment #6)
> (In reply to Kunal Mehta (Legoktm) from comment #5)
> > There's a Commons logo in the font, which is copyrighted by the WMF. Is that
> > ok to include in core?
> /me would go with no. Also besides the copyright concerns, that seems a
> violation of the principle that stuff in core should be generic
Some folks seem to think the logo is pd-simple, so that might be less of an issue.
Its not a problem to remove the commons or W marks but if its not problem it will help consistency and performance to keep them in, just let us know.
Just noting that there is some interesting discussion at bug 64789 (especially comments 8 and 9) about the benefits and drawbacks of current method (PNG+SVG image backgrounds) vs icon fonts.
Change 137888 abandoned by Jdlrobson:
Add wikifont to core
It was decided this should not go into core
We can always restore this later if we find an issue with the SVG approach. (Abandon doesn't mean destroy :-))
Per above, the decision was to use SVG/PNG, rather than a font, on web (including mobile web). However, we can still use the actual WikiFont glyphs (which are available as SVG).
This is closed, so it can't block open bugs.