I'm looking at the amount of code that goes into a single shortcode and wondering if because of the sheer number of glyphicons included with bootstrap, should their shortcodes have their own module.

For:
Optional usage
Avoids code bloat

Against:
Fragments the functionality
More overhead for maintaining

Alternative option would be to simply use the glyphicon name as a variable within the shortcode, as they won't then need a shortcode per icon. I am leaning towards this idea as it would provide the least amount of coding, with the trade-off that users will have to "know" the glyphicon naming strategy to use them.

Any thoughts, additional ideas all welcome.

Comments

dreamleaf’s picture

Assigned: Unassigned » dreamleaf

Going with the icon name as the context, should mean minimal code needed.

dreamleaf’s picture

Assigned: dreamleaf » Unassigned
Status: Active » Closed (fixed)

Glyphicons added, should appear in 7.x.1.1 dev release