Re: [REPLACE] gnome-panel icon

[Francis Whittle <fudje phreaker net>]

On 2003.06.23 19:46, Lapo Calamandrei wrote:
> Sorry, I don't like this one very much, for the following reasons

> 	+ we are not going to have the "foot menu" in default
> 	configuration (isn't it?), so perhaps we should avoid it in 
> the		     	 
> icon

The GNOME foot however, is not just that menu.  And, let's face it, the 
panel has been what people (user-type people, anyway) recognise as 
GNOME for a long time.  OK, so that's mixing the same part of different 
pardigms from various viewpoints (the same people have recognised the 
foot menu too, I mean) - but I think tradition has its foot in there 
(pun intended).

> 	+ the cut on the right is too "hard", it should fade or be
> 	somewhat rounded

I always liked the wavy cutoffs you get in graphs that means "there's a 
lot more continuous data here that would take up 4 million pages so 
we're not including it because it's irrelevant anyway".  Maybe an 
alpha-blended one of them?
			 
> 	+ is the arrow different? (we don't have arrows in the default 
> config too, but a grey rectangle, doesn't seems a panel :-))

The arrow is different but that one's cooler.  I know that goes against 
everything that standardisation and interface-solidarity is about, but 
I mean seriously, that circle with the 1850's style white arrow in it 
is about as visually attractive as the folder icons in the 1995 edition 
of the operating system that shall remain unnamed.

Out of interest, does anyone else think that arrow should be themeable? 
(My personal opinion is that it should share the same arrow as the 
scrollbar buttons)

> Ciao
> Lapo
>
> _______________________________________________
> gnome-themes-list mailing list
> gnome-themes-list gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-themes-list