Re: Icons of program

[Reinier Mostert <reinier mostert bigfoot com>]

Andreas Kostyrka wrote:
> 
> > > Toshio Kuratomi <badger@prtr-13.ucsc.edu> writes:
> > > Also -- by defining a very specific icon file format, we are tying
> > > ourselves
> > > to a specific set of features.  Maybe we put everything we think we
> > > could
> > > possibly want into the image file -- but ten years from now (When
> > > everyone is
> > > actually using GNOME :-) we may find that there's something new that
> > > we want
> > > -- Maybe there's a new way to do 3D modeling that's small enough to
> > > make
> > > sensible icons or a new compression algorithm that is just world's
> > > better --
> > > and if our "icons" just contain pointers to the real image, (that is
> > > then
> > > decodable by some general image library like imlib..)  then all we
> > > have to do
> > > is start defining pointers to the new image type.  If we put the image
> > > data
> > > into the icon file along with the rest of the meta-info, we have to
> > > scrap the
> > > icon format and define version-2 (and 3 and 4....)
> You still have to define version-2 of the format so the new pointers are
> recognized. And just HOW do you copy such information (and automatically
> reconcile it) to removable media?
It is much more likely that you will have to change the format when the
icon is embedded in the info file than when you just point to it.  The
info file should be text based (I hope we can agree not to subscribe to
the Windoze view of using binary files for everything).  So, pointing to
a new type of image means putting a new extensions on the filename. 
Given that you know how to read such a file, nothing basically changes.

Copying the information with a gnome tool is obvious - if you have the
info file you know how to get to the icon (otherwise, how would you
display it?).  So, one extra step in the program will copy the icon as
well.  From the command line, I'd rather take the extra step to copy the
icon file as well, than have an integrated file that I have to edit with
a special tool.  In fact, I'd probably write a script to copy both the
info and the icon file for the (once in a blue moon) times I want to
copy the files to removable media.  
 
> 
> > > Just view it (sort of) as a database problem, an normalise the
> > > file(table).  The images shouldn't be in there for the reasons that
> > > you don't build your database as one big table.
> But it's not a database problem. And if you have ever done db programming,
> than you know that sometimes violations of ER normalization are needed.
> 
> Andreas
> 
Yes, it's not a database problem (which is why I said "sort of").  But,
I think the principles hold over a wider area.  (Also, this is an
analogy 8-).
Sometimes violations are necessary, but that doesn't mean you have to do
it just for the hell of it.  

-- 
------------------------------------------------------
  reinier.mostert@bigfoot.com  	 Linux - the choice    
                                of a GNU generation!
------------------------------------------------------