Add easyJet

[runxel]

Issue: #2587

Checklist

• I updated the JSON data in _data/simple-icons.json
• I optimized the icon with SVGO or SVGOMG
• The SVG viewbox is 0 0 24 24

Description

There was sadly no svg to be found, neither on their website nor Wikipedia.
However it was easy to recreate, since the wordmark is set in Cooper Black. The kerning was adjusted to fit to a higher resolution picture of the logo.
The color #FF751A was lifted from the website's css.

[PeterShaggyNoble]

I extracted the wordmark from page 14 of this PDF and converted it to a path and your version (in red) doesn't quite line up. From page 18 ofhat PDF, as well, there are a couple more choices for the colour:

• #fe5000 from converting the Pantone
• #ff5700 from converting the CMYK
• #ff6600

[runxel]

Hey @PeterShaggyNoble. thanks for joining in here!
The link to the brand guide is great, I saw it referenced mutliple times but the links were all dead; nice to see you've found it!

However, please do your comparison with the actual logo from the website – you will see that indeed the kerning in the PDF is wrong (it was just set in Cooper Black with no additional kerning done on it).

I'm fine with either of those colors, we just need to agree on one. :D

[PeterShaggyNoble]

Ah, I completely misread your initial comment, don't know what I think you meant now! Sorry 'bout that.

From past experience, you're much better at comparisons between vector and raster than I so I'll defer to you there, pending a review from one of the other @simple-icons/maintainers, of course.

On the colour: I'd vote #ff6600 as it's provided twice in the brand guidelines. But I also think that your initial choice is an acceptable alternative given that it's also sources from easyJet, if that's the consensus.

[ericcornelissen]

I agree that the colour should be #ff6600. also note that it is marked as "Web safe" in the brand guidelines, which is where our icons will likely be use. I also think the version of the logo in the PR is correct (i.e. with kerning).

We could consider updating the URL to something that links to the brand guidelines (even if that link is dead)? @runxel, any suggestions?

[runxel]

#ff6600 it is, then!

We could link to https://easy.com/ ?
I mean, that's the parent page. I am not sure if we should link against the document itself. Pretty sure @PeterShaggyNoble would be concerned of link rot, and actually I am as well in this case.
(Given that this just a basic wordpress link it doesn't really look persistent enough)

[ericcornelissen]

@runxel I think the easyJet website is better than the easy website. I agree that link rot is a potential problem, and linking the PDF itself is not ideal in any case. The main reason I asked for suggestions is because you said earlier:

The link to the brand guide is great, I saw it referenced multiple times but the links were all dead; nice to see you've found it!

So I was wondering if any of the pages where you saw it referenced could be used as a source. If not, then I think this is fine as is.

^{at least we have a reference to the brand guidelines in this discussion...}

[runxel]

The link to the brand guide is great, I saw it referenced multiple times but the links were all dead; nice to see you've found it!

So I was wondering if any of the pages where you saw it referenced could be used as a source. If not, then I think this is fine as is.

Ah, got it, sorry!
Funnily enough, the links were all on unrelated websites (like from fontsinuse.com and therelike).
So yes, best is to stay on easyjet.com, like it was already.

[ericcornelissen]

In that case, let's leave it like this 🙂 I'll leave it to @PeterShaggyNoble to have a last look at this 👍

[PeterShaggyNoble]

All looks good to me 😃