Hi Tadayoshi, Thanks for your feedback. Maybe I was hasty in implying there might be differences in style. Looking again I see the logic to the different forms in the patterns. Initially I saw differences in line widths and colors, differences in types of coloring (gradient vs flat, border vs no border, shadow vs no shadow), but these differences do seem to be justified by the semantics of the icons.
What I really meant is that they look dated now in 2016. That's inevitable because people's expectations change very fast. For a technology that has such a future ahead of it, I think some investment in image is worthwhile. I looked for some sites offering icon sets : https://icomoon.io/#icons or search for icons on Google <https://www.google.com/search?client=ubuntu&hs=gfo&channel=fs&biw=1376&bih=776&tbs=qdr:y&tbm=isch&q=information+technology+icon+set&oq=information+technology+icon+set&gs_l=img.3...25490.30110.0.30494.22.20.0.0.0.0.92.824.19.19.0....0...1c.1.64.img..4.10.414...0i7i30k1j0i7i5i30k1j0i8i30k1j0i5i30k1.5hSHYE1O_W0&bav=on.2,or.r_cp.&bvm=bv.138169073,d.d2s&dpr=1.4&gws_rd=cr&ei=K0ckWMWyLsS9aaGksYgG> (the icon sets appear black, but people using them can change their color) Most sets use either flat areas (no borders, single color) or lines with uniform width (giving the "twisted paperclip" feel). When gradients or shadows are used (mostly they are not), they are used uniformly throughout the icon set. Some sets are colorful or festive, but they mostly refer to Christmas or the like. -- View this message in context: http://camel.465427.n5.nabble.com/Suggestions-for-new-set-of-integration-pattern-symbols-tp5789901p5789995.html Sent from the Camel Development mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
