Re: Bevels, sigh

[famrom ran es (Guillermo S. Romero / unnamed / Familia Romero)]

>Why enlarge the pixmap, then draw the pixmap?  Why not draw FROM the
>pixmap?  It's not too tough to notice that the pixmap only has 3x3
>pixels, that the border is 1, and then draw it as four lines, four
>pixels, and one filled rectangle.

Should be set then a "protocol" to decide when a pixmap is used as template
for drawing lines? Maybe all (x * x) images should be considered a template
for lines, where (x = 2 * y + 1).

Or better if a pixmap has only on pixel of "center area", the pixmap is a
"draw me as lines" one. This way you can have bevels with 2+ pixels, maybe 4
pixels in one side and 2 in others. Or strange bevels of 3 pixels on all sides.

The important thing is that the corners are painted as unscaled pixels (1,
3, 6 & 8) and that the sides can be painted as lines (2, 4, 5 & 7). The
center (#) is a plain color area for the text (or image like thick or cross?
naaahh, too much useless work, doable with the next step of themes). This is
fast to render (is not?), and these tiny pixmaps are easy to do by hand or
by the "gnome look manager". And remmber that 1 pixel bevel in 640 looks OK,
but not in 1600 (4 pixels?).

11123 (Poor ascii art/map)
11123  Non symetrical pixmap (sides with 1, 2 or 3 pixels)
444#5
66678

GSR