Re: Update to new emblem sizes
- From: Alexander Larsson <alexl redhat com>
- To: Luca Ferretti <elle uca libero it>
- Cc: jimmac ximian com, nautilus-list gnome org
- Subject: Re: Update to new emblem sizes
- Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 11:48:18 +0200
On Tue, 2007-07-24 at 10:35 +0200, Luca Ferretti wrote:
> Il giorno lun, 23/07/2007 alle 16.21 +0200, Alexander Larsson ha
> scritto:
> > On Mon, 2007-07-02 at 17:46 +0200, Luca Ferretti wrote:
> > > http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=321819
> > >
> > > Another emerging bug due to recent changes in gnome-icon-theme. Now that
> > > more and more "fixed" icons are landing in gnome-icon-theme, GNOME
> > > Desktop will show emblems at wrong sizes.
> > >
> > > Shortly, for example currently Nautilus expects to find the document
> > > emblem for 100% zoom (folders icons at 48pixels) at size under
> > > 48x48/emblems/. This is wrong, 'cause emblems under 48x48/emblems/
> > > should are 48x48 pixels too.
> > >
> > > Now emblems in gnome-icon-theme are provided at the right size in the
> > > right directory, so nautilus is staring to grab them at wrong size.
> > >
> > > There was also a thread on this list on August 2006 (search bug
> > > number).
> >
> > I don't agree that Nautilus is doing anything wrong here. And I wrote
> > both the icon spec and the nautilus code using it. Is nautilus supposed
> > to hardcode the size of the emblems as a fraction of the icon size? That
> > seems much worse for the artists, and breaks a long standing design
> > choice in nautilus (which is the only thing using these emblem icons).
> > And what size is it supposed to pick now anyway?
> >
> > The icon theme spec never really enforced that icons had to be the
> > specific size, just that they were designed to work with icons of that
> > size.
>
> Alex, honestly I agree with the idea to have, for example, 22x22 pixels
> icons under 22x22/<role>/ directories, at least from icon designer/theme
> creator point of view.
So, what pixel size should nautilus use for emblems for e.g. 48x48? If I
have to hardcode a size (or more useful, a percentage of the full icon
size), what should it be?
> But I've no idea about how this should impact on source code in
> applications and in Nautilus. Try to contact jimmac (I can't do it, I'm
> going to vacation for the next month. See you in September), I know he
> (and/or other icon makers) was trying to do something to fix the emblem
> issue.
I'm going on vacation next week, and I'm pretty busy with other things
too atm, so I won't have time to look at this really. I'm cc:ing jimmac
so that they are at least aware of this issue.
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]