5 ms·
I'm re-considering the license for the font itself. I agree, attribution on a commercial site would not be ideal. Attribution in code, however, seems reasonable
by fortawesome 15y ago
I'm re-considering the license for the font itself. I agree, attribution on a commercial site would not be ideal. Attribution in code, however, seems reasonable.
I used the classes from the Glyphicons set for backwards compatibility, but every icon was designed from scratch. If you look closely, you'll notice many of them are quite different.
- wiradikusuma 15y agoHow about putting it in humans.txt?
- mjking 15y agoGreat work! +1 for attribution in the code on commercial sites.
- justincormack 15y agoAttribution in code is unworkable if you minify code as it will no longer be there. Coders who are looking that hard will be able to work out where the awsomeness came from. Embrace a sane open source license please, something that would eg allow distribution with Debian.
- mdda 15y agoMinifiers almost always have an option to preserve specially marked comments for precisely this reason (to preserve the license information).
- cobychapple 15y agoI would have thought attribution using comments in the main HTML would be an easy solution if you're minifying your CSS.
- drostie 15y agoAre you actually planning to sue people for not providing attribution? If not, you might just want to save yourself the headache by using a more permissive license -- BSD and MIT are popular but if you really like Creative Commons, they have the Zero License: https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ Up to you, though.
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]