Jakob Petsovits wrote:
> On Wednesday, 21. May 2008, James Richard Tyrer wrote:
>> Jakob Petsovits wrote:
>>> On Wednesday, 21. May 2008, James Richard Tyrer wrote:
>>>> Ah maybe.  However, we still need an icon named: "zoom" for fall back
>>>> for missing zoom-* icons.  Are all KDE icon themes going to have all of
>>>> the "zoom-*" icons.  I don't think so.
>>> No, that's the whole point that I tried to explain: no fallback could
>>> reasonably cater for all the different zoom icons, so if a theme doesn't
>>> have those then it better falls back to Oxygen
>> Falling back to Oxygen is something that only KDE does.  You need to
>> broaden your thinking to the free desktop with other applications, other
>> toolkits, and other icon themes.  In short, you need to think outside
>> the box -- KDE centric thinking is the box and it needs to go.
> 
> Other desktops and applications have fallback icons as well if they use this 
> icon name. 

This icon name isn't in the standard and it does not conform to the 
standard.  So that probability is very low.

> If for example Gimp wants to use page-zoom, they'd probably put 
> their version into hicolor (as it's not included in the spec) which is used 
> as fallback in case any 3rd party theme doesn't provide the icon.

Right and we need an icon named "zoom" in case a third party doesn't 
provide an icon named "zoom-fit-height".  This isn't going to fall back 
to "page-zoom"!

QED

-- 
JRT
______________________________________________________________________________
kde-artists@kde.org |  https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-artists