Re: Moving towards actually using icon-naming-spec names

["Matthias Clasen" <matthias clasen gmail com>]

On 2/12/07, Rodney Dawes <dobey novell com> wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-02-09 at 12:39 -0500, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> > I don't see much progress with moving towards actual use of the icon naming spec
> > yet. Bug 396994 has a patch to make the .directory files in gnome-menus use
> > spec-compliant names where applicable. I think we should do that for 2.18.
> >
> > While doing the patch, I noticed that the icon naming spec does not list
> > preferences
>
> This is what "preferences-desktop" is for. At least, based on the
> current organization of things in GNOME.
>
> > settings (for the Administration menu)
>
> This is what "preferences-system" is for.


Reality doesn't follow you here; in the current gnome-menus directory files,
preferences-desktop is used for the "Preferences>Look and Feel" submenu
and preferences-system is used for the "Preferences>System" submenu.
It might have helped to go with the established terminology of
preferences vs settings...


> > documentation
>
> Where does "documentation" appear in the menu system at all? And what,
> if anything, appears under it? We already have "Help" on the menu, and
> it gets the "help-browser" icon.

We have a Documentation submenu below Preferences and Administration
in RHEL. It shows, well, documentation.

> > as standard categories. Maybe preferences and applications are implied by
> > the fallback-to-generic names scheme in the spec, but they should probably
> > be listed explicitly, since e.g. the gnome icon theme is missing them.
>
> They are not implied by the fallback, nor should they be listed
> explicitly.

Please explain how they are not implied by the fallback ? Does the
fallback only work for certain icon names ? If so, which ones ?
Anyway, as things stand, the icon naming spec does not currently
provide enough names to cover the preferences/administration menus and
their submenus.