deblan-mirror/Fork-Awesome
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/ForkAwesome/Fork-Awesome synced 2024-05-12 19:36:34 +02:00
Code Issues Projects Releases Wiki Activity

using standard markdown image syntax

Browse source
This commit is contained in:
Doug 2023-04-05 23:25:30 +02:00
parent 7715903e1c
commit 8f00a67425
1 changed files with 5 additions and 5 deletions
Show stats Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

10
posts/2023-04-05_forkawesomeSurvey/surveyResults.md
View file

@ -4,29 +4,29 @@ Here are the results of a survey I ran for about 4 months, from the 17th of Dece
Here are the results, graphically depicted as best I could, with a short written summary after each: Here are the results, graphically depicted as best I could, with a short written summary after each:
![[forkawesome survey/img/1_use.png]] ![](img/1_use.png)
Most respondents (22, 78%) had used Forkawesome. Most (18, 64%) were currently using Forkawesome. Most respondents (22, 78%) had used Forkawesome. Most (18, 64%) were currently using Forkawesome.
![[forkawesome survey/img/2_implement.png]] ![](img/2_implement.png)
Implementing icons through icon font was by far the most preferred method (19, 67%). All the SVG methods combined didn't even get half as many preferences (7, 25%). Implementing icons through icon font was by far the most preferred method (19, 67%). All the SVG methods combined didn't even get half as many preferences (7, 25%).
I'm curious what the other methods are people are using... presumably using raster images with `<img>` or similar? I wish I had given that option. I'm curious what the other methods are people are using... presumably using raster images with `<img>` or similar? I wish I had given that option.
![[forkawesome survey/img/3_perceive.png]] ![](img/3_perceive.png)
"Ease of font icon use" and "licensing" were perceived only positively. "style of icons", "ease of cross-platform use" and "number/coverage of icons" were perceived mostly positively. "Ease of SVG use" and "governance/management of project" had mixed perceptions. "Frequency of releases" was perceived mostly negatively. "Ease of font icon use" and "licensing" were perceived only positively. "style of icons", "ease of cross-platform use" and "number/coverage of icons" were perceived mostly positively. "Ease of SVG use" and "governance/management of project" had mixed perceptions. "Frequency of releases" was perceived mostly negatively.
Non-responses, "no opinion" and unanswered questions, were highest for "ease of SVG use" and "ease of cross-platform use". This corresponds with the previous question suggesting less SVG use. It also suggests Non-responses, "no opinion" and unanswered questions, were highest for "ease of SVG use" and "ease of cross-platform use". This corresponds with the previous question suggesting less SVG use. It also suggests
![[forkawesome survey/img/4_compare.png]] ![](img/4_compare.png)
With the exception of Fontawesome, most responses were not responses. I take this to mean unfamiliarity with the other icons sets. Only "your favorite" and "ionicons" had overall positive responses, and even then still mixed. With the exception of Fontawesome, most responses were not responses. I take this to mean unfamiliarity with the other icons sets. Only "your favorite" and "ionicons" had overall positive responses, and even then still mixed.
I find these results a bit difficult to interpret, but it at least suggests that for the respondents, there was no clearly superior icon set, given all their criteria for consideration. I find these results a bit difficult to interpret, but it at least suggests that for the respondents, there was no clearly superior icon set, given all their criteria for consideration.
![[forkawesome survey/img/5_best.png]] ![](img/5_best.png)
The final question, in which respondents could select as many of the options as they wished. Most respondents (18, 64%) would like to see the project reactivate. Significant minorities (heck, everyone is a significant minority in a group of 28!) voted for the remaining options: to focus on SVG usage (8, 28%), to continue as before (7, 25%) and to encourage users elsewhere (4, 14%) The final question, in which respondents could select as many of the options as they wished. Most respondents (18, 64%) would like to see the project reactivate. Significant minorities (heck, everyone is a significant minority in a group of 28!) voted for the remaining options: to focus on SVG usage (8, 28%), to continue as before (7, 25%) and to encourage users elsewhere (4, 14%)