Re: xpm vs. png

[John Ellis <johne bellatlantic net>]

Eckehard Berns <eb@berns.prima.de> wrote:

>I put all gnome stock xpms in gnome-libs/libgnomeui/pixmaps and added
>xpm2rgb.c. Also I changed the Makefile.am to include every stock_*.xpm in
>gnome-stock-imlib.h.  This could be done in a smarter way (e.g. just one call
>of xpm2rgb) but it's a start.

I just added a tool to convert to rgb data in gnome-libs/tools/convertrgb
yesterday. It needs a little tweaking, but it can convert all your images into
one big *.h file for you. The advantage here is that I use Imlib in such a way
that an X display is not required, So you can even compile from the the console.

>Hmm, thinking about the subject line maybe I should have added the png
>versions of the gnome stock icons? Does this make sense?

IMHO, png's are better, but since they are not installed and only used to
compile, it really does not matter.

>> Doing this, if only for gnome-stock, would be very nice. Right now there is
>> no simple way to view the images included in gnome-libs. you must either
>> find the homepage that contains a list, make a small gnome-hello type that
>> displays them for you, or, like I did, find the right one by trial and
>> error.
>
>I try to update stock_demo.c whenever I add a stock icon. You should find all
>pixmaps in stock_demo's main window.
>
>> The image names help, but seeing the difference between 'preferences'
>> and 'properties', for instance, becomes tedious.
>
>'Preferences' are meant to be the program's global preferences. 'Properties'
>should open a dialog for the properties of a document or something. If
>somebody knows better words for these functions I would be happy to change the
>names for gnome-stock.

The names are fine, now that I know about stock_demo :)

John
--
John Ellis <johne@bellatlantic.net>
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Haven/5235/