Re: icon naming spec and gnome-vfs

["BJörn Lindqvist" <bjourne gmail com>]

On 8/1/06, Rodney Dawes <dobey novell com> wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-08-01 at 16:45 -0400, Pat Suwalski wrote:
> > In my opinion, yes, it has to come now, or it will never come. It is
> > already a regression that it was there and is no longer there. I prefer
> > the look of my 2.8 desktop with icons that were "consistent enough" to
> > my 2.12 desktop where I've lost information that was presented to me
> > before. I agree that the old way was not maintainable.
>
> You haven't lost any information, you only think you have. You're
> looking for the information in the wrong place.
>
> If you have a suggestion for how exactly one might show the difference
> between tiff, jpeg, svg, wmf, gif, png, tga, and whatever else there is,
> without using meaningful text in the icon, I am all ears. Until then, we

Use different images for different file types. The yellow-black
savannah icon for png files, another type of image for jpeg files. It
doesn't really matter what icons are used, as long as the icons for
png and jpeg images are DIFFERENT. Adding text to the icon just makes
it more explicit. I have read the GNOME HIG and I can't find where it
says that using text in icons is wrong and that different kinds of
images must share the same icon. And if it is written there, then the
HIG is wrong, IMHO.

--
mvh Björn