Re: Update to new emblem sizes

[Alexander Larsson <alexl redhat com>]

On Tue, 2007-07-24 at 12:02 +0200, Luca Ferretti wrote:
> Il giorno mar, 24/07/2007 alle 11.48 +0200, Alexander Larsson ha
> scritto:
> > 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:
> 
> <snip>
> 
> > > 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?
> 
> Currently gnome-icon-theme is following tango guidelines, i.e. is
> providing icons at 16, 22, 24 and 32 pixels (plus, of course, 48x48
> pixels but using SVG). Some emblems should be available at 8x8 pixels
> too.
> 
> Maybe something like this could work
> 
> Zoom  |  Icon size  | Emblem size
> 100%  |    48       |   32
>  75%  |    32       |   22/24
>  50%  |    22/24    |   16
>  25%  |    16       |    8

What are the current emblem sizes in gnome-icon-theme then? How was the
change made from keeping emblems how we used to do it?

The table you listed here is just hardcoded for each particular icon
size, and won't work on any other icon size (i.e. its not a single
scaling factor). There are other sizes too, like zoomed in (rather than
out as in your table). I guess once could have a list of "common" emblem
sizes and just pick the first one that is smaller than the current size.