But how often do people share attributes between fonts and icons? And how often do you need to inherit attributes that way?
I'm not sure why an icon font would be easier to use than SVGs. Yes, you only have to reference a file once (the font file), but that actually makes it more difficult to use, because now you have to remember two things: how to reference the file, and how to reference the icon.
With SVG, it's simpler, because everything is usually contained in one CSS rule. Yes, it has a reference to a file, but does that matter from the viewpoint of simplicity? I.e., make another icon? Then just copy a CSS rule and edit it.
Also, using an icon font makes it difficult to substitute a single icon by another icon. Suddenly, you have to start rearranging your CSS. With SVGs not so: just edit the referenced url.
Anyway, I love the font-awesome graphics. Except for a few icons, such as icons containing people (they look too bulky and inelegant, for my taste). But most icon-sets don't get people-icons right.
I'm not sure why an icon font would be easier to use than SVGs. Yes, you only have to reference a file once (the font file), but that actually makes it more difficult to use, because now you have to remember two things: how to reference the file, and how to reference the icon.
With SVG, it's simpler, because everything is usually contained in one CSS rule. Yes, it has a reference to a file, but does that matter from the viewpoint of simplicity? I.e., make another icon? Then just copy a CSS rule and edit it.
Also, using an icon font makes it difficult to substitute a single icon by another icon. Suddenly, you have to start rearranging your CSS. With SVGs not so: just edit the referenced url.
Anyway, I love the font-awesome graphics. Except for a few icons, such as icons containing people (they look too bulky and inelegant, for my taste). But most icon-sets don't get people-icons right.