Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Fixed font awesome overleaf display issue #343

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

jensschaefer
Copy link

Corrected fa-symbol for phone, not displayed correctly in overleaf.

Corrected fa-symbol for phone, not displayed correctly in [overleaf](https://www.overleaf.com).
@OJFord
Copy link
Collaborator

OJFord commented Nov 10, 2021

Can you elaborate on 'not displayed correctly'?

Since mobile and phone are different icons, I don't really want to suddenly change it for someone who may be seeing it render correctly.

@jensschaefer
Copy link
Author

I realized, I had misinterpreted the icon back in the day and introduced the phone icon for the sake of consistency.

Bildschirmfoto 2021-12-13 um 15 16 00

With the phone icon the top bar looked more consistent.

Bildschirmfoto 2021-12-13 um 15 20 25

The displayed icon looks more like mobile-alt. I think the actual mobile icon would fit here even better.

@OJFord
Copy link
Collaborator

OJFord commented Feb 11, 2022

I think it maybe is a better fit, and it seems more visually consistent with the email icon, I'm just not crazy about suddenly changing that for anyone using it when they update (maybe they liked the old one).

How do you feel about that @posquit0, and versioning/'breaking changes' as it were in general?

@antenore
Copy link
Contributor

If I can add my opinion, I prefer the icon proposed by @jensschaefer
On the other side, who doesn't like the default icon, is free to change it in the cls file.

@antenore
Copy link
Contributor

To clarify it further. I'd merge this request and those that do not like it can always change the awesome-cv.cls file.

@OJFord
Copy link
Collaborator

OJFord commented Apr 17, 2022

This has also come up in #418, and as I described there think I'm inclined to keep them the same but make it more easily editable as in #420.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants