On Wed, 2002-01-30 at 12:40, Guenter Milde wrote:
> 
> I just looked at the icons (and once again at kmag) and I have to admit,
> that for me, the icon (as nice as it is in itself) does not point at a
> magnification tool :-(

You're right :), maybe I have abstract-enabled mind, and people just
need plain symbols. 
> 
>   You are right, a lens is not very original/specific. (Still it might be
>   the best thing around)

I'm wondering why we have Wilber for Gimp icon, black sun for Kvirc
icon, bull for Emacs icon,a fish for Kbabel, green ball with grey
triangle for Kdevelop, flower for Licq, etc.

>   
>   As opposed to KDE itself or Konqueror, kmag is a little helper app, so I
>   don't expect that people will learn to combine the original symbol with
>   the actual program (like the gear or Konqui).

Forget my icon, but I really think that people who use an application
will easily learn to associate its icon with application (and doesn't
matter how abstract the icon is). You need it - you'll learn it.

> 
> Acutally, I did not catch that these were intended to be arrows. Also,
> arrows for me mean magnification of a window frame, not content 
> (arrow = move, 4 arrows in four directions = move borders)

Hm.

> 
> Wouldn't it be clearer if there where something really magnified? We don't
> need a standard magnifying glass then. I know, my attached example if far
> from ideal, it's only there to show my concept. (Anyone feel free to use it
> and make it a "real icon".)

I see your point, and I like design but the only thing is that your icon
has to be also in 16x16 & 22x22 sizes. I'm afraid you wont be able to
see tiny stipes which gives magnification effect on your icon. You'll be
only able to see letter E, and then it is bad, because some could
misinterperet it as icon for Microsoft Excell, or E-mail etc.

regards,

antialias

_______________________________________________
kde-artists mailing list
kde-artists@mail.kde.org
http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-artists