Re: icon naming spec and gnome-vfs

Jakub Steiner wrote:
I don't know how much time exactly went into gnome icon theme over the
years, but I do feel like we failed to provide a good icon theming
platform for distributions. Back then we had old Gnome 1.0 styled icons
inconsistency. Then I tried to create an icon for every single random
mimetype people requested. Yes we had all the various CD media icons.
But there's less artists than there are free software hackers, and there
isn't too many of those either. Ad-hoc naming, missing sizes and thus
blurry icons for small sizes and a general mess was the result.

In my opinion, while 1.x was horribly inconsistent with icons, you guys did an amazing job for the early 2.x days, which had a good balance of icons.

So yea, a specific tiff icon would be nice, but does it have to come
now? Does it have to be in the core icon theme? Before we make sure all
icons are named properly, have all the sizes provided, include the
artwork "source" I don't think we should worry about those yet. I'm
talking about the filetypes now, I'm going a bit soft on the device
icons now.. :)

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.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]