New material design icon block icons are much smaller and thus less readable. #1061
Comments
|
Hmm. Will check the scaling.
It differs in methodics.
Anyhow, bigger symbols should be in Symbols Only Nerd Font.ttf (without Mono). Maybe 🤔
I will have a look.
…________________________________
From: Dragon-Hatcher ***@***.***>
Sent: Saturday, 21 January 2023 02:06
To: ryanoasis/nerd-fonts
Cc: Subscribed
Subject: [ryanoasis/nerd-fonts] New material design icon block icons are much smaller and thus less readable. (Issue #1061)
🗹 Requirements
I have searched the issues for my issue and found nothing related and/or helpful
I have searched the FAQ for help
I have searched the Wiki for help
🎯 Subject of the issue
Experienced behavior:
Identical icons from the old and new material design blocks render much smaller in the new block and are thus less readable.
Expected behavior:
Identical icons from the old and new material design blocks should render the same.
Example symbols:
U+F631 (Old) vs U+F0132 (New)
U+F503 (Old) vs U+F0004 (New)
🔧 Your Setup
Which font are you using (e.g. Anonymice Powerline Nerd Font Complete.ttf)?
Symbols-2048-em Nerd Font Complete Mono.ttf
Where did you get the file from (download link, self patched, source downloaded from link...)
Downloaded from the release page (version 2.3.1)
Which terminal emulator are you using (e.g. iterm2, urxvt, gnome, konsole)?
Kitty
Are you using OS X, Linux or Windows? And which specific version or distribution?
Linux Mint 21, Cinnamon
★ Screenshots (Optional)
(Note that Kitty squishes icons into one cell when there is no trailing space and expands them to full size when there is. The first two icons in each section have a trailing space. Periods for scale. Here is the command I ran: echo -e 'Old: U+F631 | U+F503 |\nNew: U+F0132 | U+F0004 |\n....................................')
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.Message ID: ***@***.***>
|
|
Actually they are all small for me with the non mono version. |
|
Hmm, in the font new (bottom) and old (top row)
Well. The
While the old scaling (top row) the icons are individually scaled, the new scaling produces different (usually smaller) scaling. Assume someone who wants to show See more example for 'glyph sets' that should be all scaled identical for best user experience: #773 (comment) |
|
Ah. I understand the rational for the resizing now. Does it make sense to keep the old ones different as an option for a larger scale then? Seems weird though considering they will be removed. |
|
We could add individual scale-groups, but with 8000 icons that approach sounded rather maintenance intensive, or at least the initial work that has to be put into it is a bit high, given I'm just one person ;-D So, I have no real solution for that, open for all suggestions. |
|
Oh. Are you saying that every icon is scaled the same amount as every other icon but they could be larger if someone put in the work to figure out which icons needed to be scaled together? I might be willing to look into doing that. Would, for example, various sets of codepoint ranges be sufficent? |
|
This also creates some weird artificats like this:
Same font scale |
|
One can define groups of glyphs (codepoints). A group can consist of a list of single codepoints or codepoint ranges. Here is an example: FONTA_SCALE_LIST = {'ScaleGroups': [
[0xf005, 0xf006, 0xf089], # star, star empty, half star
range(0xf026, 0xf028 + 1), # volume off, down, up
range(0xf02b, 0xf02c + 1), # tag, tags
range(0xf031, 0xf035 + 1), # font et al
range(0xf044, 0xf046 + 1), # edit, share, check (boxes)
range(0xf048, 0xf052 + 1), # multimedia buttons
range(0xf060, 0xf063 + 1), # arrows
[0xf053, 0xf054, 0xf077, 0xf078], # chevron all directions
range(0xf07d, 0xf07e + 1), # resize
range(0xf0a4, 0xf0a7 + 1), # pointing hands
[0xf0d7, 0xf0d8, 0xf0d9, 0xf0da, 0xf0dc, 0xf0dd, 0xf0de], # caret all directions and same looking sort
range(0xf100, 0xf107 + 1), # angle
range(0xf130, 0xf131 + 1), # mic(At the moment) the Material Design Icons are all scaled the same because
I'm not sure that such ScaleGroups is really a realistic way. |
|
The chess pieces are all the same width:
Not sure how you create the output. Codepoints |
I can check which glyphs make the scaling so small, it seems to be not the majority ;-) |
|
Just eyeballing it perhaps U+F068D nf-md-solid is the issue? If not it may be a good baseline. |
|
Well, But there are other glyphs that use the full dimension at least in some directions.
|
|
Hmm. So do you think it is feasible to increase the overall scale or no? |
|
Just from your image (old = individually maximized icons), it seems 'a lot' of pairs are ok, but not all (blue marker) Then here is a look at the original icons (bottom-left) and square-individually-scaled (top right).
They all go wrong as you see. Worst is the 'eject' that gets ridiculously big compared with previous-track. In principle I guess we could change to 'maximize individually' and add "groups" of icons that should be handled as one. One needs to look at one square-ish scale (i.e. Symbols Only Mono) and one very slender and tall because problems might turn up only in one of them. I guess there are no fonts out there that are wider than tall, so we do not need to check that. Keep in mind that some people use the font for terminals, but other use them to show icons in GUIs. So the feasibility is just a matter of examining three sets of each 7000 icons (original vs (square / oblong)). |
|
Alright. I'm going to close this then until someone wants to do the work of grouping several thousand icons. Thanks for clearing this up! |
|
We could also solve this the other way around. NOW scale each symbol individually, and add groups for glyphs when someone complains about some mismatch concretely. What do you think? In fact that was the way we always handled it before 😬 |
[why] The Material Design Icons have for sure pairs of glyphs that people would like to have scaled identically. Because the sheer number of glyphs and because they are already very nicely and uniformly scaled within their design space the MDI at the new codepoints where all scaled the same with taking the theoretical design space as ScaleGlyph. But that means all icons get scaled a bit smaller than before, where we individually scaled each Material Design Icon to fill the cell. This lead to numerous complaints. [how] We take a different approach now, more conventional maybe. Especially in the light that the older bigger icons will get dropped; and people love them. So the uniform scaling is ditched and the individual scaling is used. Fixes: #1061 Note: greshake/i3status-rust#1728 Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <[email protected]>
[why] The Material Design Icons have for sure pairs of glyphs that people would like to have scaled identically. Because the sheer number of glyphs and because they are already very nicely and uniformly scaled within their design space the MDI at the new codepoints where all scaled the same with taking the theoretical design space as ScaleGlyph. But that means all icons get scaled a bit smaller than before, where we individually scaled each Material Design Icon to fill the cell. This lead to numerous complaints. [how] We take a different approach now, more conventional maybe. Especially in the light that the older bigger icons will get dropped; and people love them. So the uniform scaling is ditched and the individual scaling is used. Fixes: #1061 Note: greshake/i3status-rust#1728 Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <[email protected]>
Nerd Fonts 3.0 introduced some breaking changes to icons that were used in this preset. Users using newer installs of nerd fonts would no longer show up correctly. These icons were part of the material design selection, and noted to not scale similarly to other glyphs in the set and were thus replaced with ones that fixed these changes. See PR for full details: ryanoasis/nerd-fonts#1061
|
This issue has been automatically locked since there has not been any recent activity (i.e. last half year) after it was closed. It helps our maintainers focus on the active issues. If you have found a problem that seems similar, please open a new issue, complete the issue template with all the details necessary to reproduce, and mention this issue as reference. |
[why] The Material Design Icons have for sure pairs of glyphs that people would like to have scaled identically. Because the sheer number of glyphs and because they are already very nicely and uniformly scaled within their design space the MDI at the new codepoints where all scaled the same with taking the theoretical design space as ScaleGlyph. But that means all icons get scaled a bit smaller than before, where we individually scaled each Material Design Icon to fill the cell. This lead to numerous complaints. [how] We take a different approach now, more conventional maybe. Especially in the light that the older bigger icons will get dropped; and people love them. So the uniform scaling is ditched and the individual scaling is used. Fixes: ryanoasis#1061 Note: greshake/i3status-rust#1728 Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <[email protected]>
🗹 Requirements
🎯 Subject of the issue
Experienced behavior:
Identical icons from the old and new material design blocks render much smaller in the new block and are thus less readable.
Expected behavior:
Identical icons from the old and new material design blocks should render the same.
Example symbols:
U+F631(Old) vsU+F0132(New)U+F503(Old) vsU+F0004(New)🔧 Your Setup
Anonymice Powerline Nerd Font Complete.ttf)?Symbols-2048-em Nerd Font Complete Mono.ttfiterm2,urxvt,gnome,konsole)?★ Screenshots (Optional)
(Note that Kitty squishes icons into one cell when there is no trailing space and expands them to full size when there is. The first two icons in each section have a trailing space. Periods for scale. Here is the command I ran:
echo -e 'Old: U+F631 | U+F503 |\nNew: U+F0132 | U+F0004 |\n....................................')The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: