Re: Gnome Beautification "Movement"

[Mark Finlay <sisob eircom net>]

Sorry - I ment Industrial not wonderland

On Fri, 2003-06-13 at 19:25, Andrew Johnson wrote:
> On Fri, 2003-06-13 at 13:01, Mark Finlay wrote:
> > On Tue, 2003-06-10 at 19:04, Andrew Johnson wrote:
> > > What about GTK/Widget themes? I would say that is just as important as
> > > icons and backgrounds,  and sadly lacking in the Gnome mainstream.
> > 
> > Sorry I took so long to reply to this.
> > 
> > It is important in the long run, but IMHO not half as important as 
> > the icon theme at the moment. Icons have a very important usability 
> > function and having bad ones as such have a negative effect on the
> > user experience. As well as that, the gtk themes that come with gnome
> > atm aren't totally crap. Would love to see wonderland in there though.
> 
> As for wonderland, it never will be included, because afaik RH has asked
> it not be part of any of the gtk/gnome packages...
> 
> I am not debating icons. I agree. Icons are just as important, probably
> more so. But at the same time the gtk themes are very much a part of how
> people perceive gnome, consider how often people talk about using kde
> because "it has better themes" they aren't usually talking about the
> icons, they are talking about the widgets, since most of the best kde
> icons are ported to gnome anyway. It isn't that gtk doesn't have some
> decent themes, its that gnome doesn't include as many really good
> themes. And since when it comes to gtk and icons, especially with the
> default theme, there is supposed to be a tight integration, I feel it is
> important to discuss along side these others. Good icons improve a good
> gtk theme, but a bad gtk or only half-rate gtk theme can also have a
> negative impact on the icon theme. 
> 
> Not to push this ahead of the icons at all, nor should it take priority
> just that we shouldn't ignore it entirely. From what I have seen most
> people are concerned with icons and icons only and push aside gtk themes
> and there quality in favour of just using existing themes, I see a lot
> of this in gnome-themes where a lot of themes, many I do not even
> consider very good or which are incomplete, are included, and then never
> fixed or improved, and currently I do not think any of them are all that
> good and still fail to provide any that go with the default icons well.
> I saw a lot of this in gnome-themes-extras, where the focus was on just
> using the best existing theme and leaving it at that, as opposed to
> truly focusing on tight integration, which is why I helped make new
> themes, or modifying the existing themes for better consistency. 
> 
> Basically what I am getting at is this, when it comes to icons the
> integration of all icons is a given, but as far as gnome is concerned
> _all_ the themes are part of the conglomerate whole, the gtk theme is
> one part of the whole theme, just as every icon is. To beautify the
> GNOME default theme means taking all parts of the theme into account not
> just the icons. IMO its like taking a theme comprised of all
> square/harsh lined red icons like Smokey-Red without a home folder, and
> then including a cartoony pink or aquamarine home directory from a
> different theme, say Nuvola or Noia rather then make a new one, or make
> it fit.
> 
> Andrew
> 
> _______________________________________________
> gnome-themes-list mailing list
> gnome-themes-list gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-themes-list
-- 
Mark Finlay <sisob eircom net>