I've been trying to use a more current version of Font Awesome on my site than the one provided by WikiDot. While I can use it successfully on any page that includes a [[module css]] at the top to reference bootstrapcdn's FontAwesome files, I can't do the same thing with my site-wide style sheet because the wiki engine links to FontAwesome after my custom style sheet.
Here is the HTML output for one of my pages where the CSS files are referenced:
<style type="text/css" id="internal-style">
/* modules */
/* bootstrap */
@import url(https://d3g0gp89917ko0.cloudfront.net/v--951c46c9f044/common--bootstrap/3.2.0/bootstrap.min.css);
/* theme */
@import url(https://d3g0gp89917ko0.cloudfront.net/v--951c46c9f044/common--theme/bootstrap-base/css/style.css);
@import url(https://xfi.wdfiles.com/local--theme/devhelp3-responsive/style.css);
</style>
<link href="https://d3g0gp89917ko0.cloudfront.net/v--951c46c9f044/common--fonts/awesome/3.2.1/font-awesome.min.css" rel="stylesheet">
My site theme is the last item in the <style> block, just beofre the <link href...> to the older version of FontAwesome.
Could you please include the older version of Font Awesome before the user style sheet so we have the option of using a newer one if we choose?
Nice catch, Rob. It would also be nice if new versions were updated in a timely manner after verifying they wouldn't break existing sites. I'm not sure what mechanism would need to be in place to monitor that. Maybe have the user base ask for an update would be enough to have it done.
Community Admin
Thanks, Ed. I agree that it would be nice if Wikidot updated their version of Font Awesome from time to time, but this can get tricky. I've found that newer versions not only include new icons, but have also modified some existing icons. A good example is the "file-text" icon. In the older version, it is a bit smaller (about 8px wide at 14pt font) with only two lines of "text" on the image while the newer version is larger (about 12px wide at 14pt font) with three lines of "text" on the image. This size difference affects how items in a menu I'm designing line up with each other when used with the same CSS. It doesn't break anything per se, but it does affect the layout a little bit.
Rob Ostapiuk, Principal Technical Training Engineer, Microchip Technology Inc.
Microchip Developer Help
There is currently support for a couple of javascript libraries (skrollr and jparallax) that can be added to a bootstrap site by adding [[use skrollr]] and/or [[use jparallax]] in a custom layout. It would be (font!)awesome if similar syntax could be implemented for fontawesome and other "pre-approved" libraries. That way, we could markup a layout with something like [[include fontawesome3.2.1]] or [[include fontawesome4.3.0]].
I had a brief discussion with Squark on this topic when he was still around.
Community Admin
Cool! I didn't know about skrollr and jparallax support. Something similar to that would be perfect for Font Awesome.
Rob Ostapiuk, Principal Technical Training Engineer, Microchip Technology Inc.
Microchip Developer Help
For now build in font awesome styles were moved above user defined ones. Indeed includes for font awesome and other libraries (like [[use XXXXXX]]) would be handy in general, but it's probably another case/issue/idea.
Bartłomiej Bąkowski @ Wikidot Inc.
';.;' TeRq (Write PM)