Closed jonathanolson closed 9 years ago
I believe that the content file is sherpa/libs/font-awesome.txt (or something like that, going from memory, can't check right now.)
I believe that the content file is sherpa/libs/font-awesome.txt (or something like that, going from memory, can't check right now.)
Yup, https://github.com/phetsims/sherpa/blob/master/lib/font-awesome.txt
This was introduced in svn Commit: 72724 By samreid on 09 Apr 2013 22:44, we can probably use that to determine the font awesome version number.
According to the font awesome history
very early pass at 3.1.0 davegandy authored on Apr 2, 2013
So I think this is a "good enough" guess for the version of Font Awesome that we are using.
Last commit from 3.0.2 tag is Jan 17, 2013. Last commit from 3.1.0 is May 10, 2013, so perhaps we were using 3.0.2, since I was using a release (not from github master)
I found an identical match based on content diff here:
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/FortAwesome/Font-Awesome/v3.0.2/font/fontawesome-webfont.svg
According to https://github.com/FortAwesome/Font-Awesome/tree/v3.0.2
The Font Awesome font is licensed under the SIL Open Font License - http://scripts.sil.org/OFL
but
The Font Awesome pictograms are licensed under the CC BY 3.0 License - http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/
We are using the pictograms, not the font, so we'll need to update our license accordingly.
I am very confused--I looked in the font files (TTF and OTF) and they contain pictograms. We are using the text from the SVG file, so I guess that is considered pictograms. The other complication is that it says the pictograms are CC BY 3.0, but it also says after CC BY 3.0:
Attribution is no longer required in Font Awesome 3.0, but much appreciated: "Font Awesome by Dave Gandy - http://fortawesome.github.com/Font-Awesome"
"By" means attribution required, but "Attribution is no longer required" contradicts this. So confusing.
I recommend to change the filename to match the one on the web.
@ariel-phet do you want a graphic artist to redesign these iconic fonts we are using so we can steer clear of this licensing confusion? We are currently using:
cut times_circle fullscreen home reorder check_without_box warning_sign eye_close eye_open warning_sign volume_up volume_off check check_empty
I did not see any usages of font-awesome.txt so I am proceeding to rename it.
Renamed and updated the third-party-licenses.json above. But I also noted that the file is "fontawesome-webfont-3.0.2" so I am back to being confused about whether we are technically using the "pictograms" or the "font", since "webfont" is in the filename that we are using.
Also it is in the "font" directory--this begs the question: what exactly are the pictographs?
But this page explains: http://fortawesome.github.io/Font-Awesome/license/
SIL OFL Applies to all desktop and webfont files in the following directory: font-awesome/fonts/.
In the latest version, the directory is "fonts" and it contains the SVG. In the 3.0.2, the directory is "font" and it contains the SVG. So I think we can infer that we should be using the SIL OFL (as we have), not the CC BY 3.0.
Reassigning to @ariel-phet to respond to the last few comments.
@ariel-phet said we won't be redrawing these icons at the moment. @samreid will review the SIL OFL to see if any other work is required.
I read through http://scripts.sil.org/cms/scripts/page.php?item_id=OFL_web and did not see any troublesome language, closing.
Reopening, we never changed the license from CC-BY to SIL after discovering that pictograms are covered under the SIL.
It's definitely not 4.3.0 for what we're using, as our icon names don't exist there. The icon prefix looks to be in 3.x (e.g. http://fortawesome.github.io/Font-Awesome/3.2.1/icons/), not the latest version.
@samreid, can you identify which version of font-awesome was used, and optionally check in the needed content so we could regenerate the file?