[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-artists
Subject:    Re: [kde-artists] New Oxygen icon "page-zoom"
From:       James Richard Tyrer <tyrerj () acm ! org>
Date:       2008-05-26 10:27:13
Message-ID: 483A9081.8010700 () acm ! org
[Download RAW message or body]

Jakob Petsovits wrote:
> On Monday, 26. May 2008, James Richard Tyrer wrote:
>> Jakob Petsovits wrote:
>>> b) The original, "unthemed" icons "zoom-in", "zoom-out" and 
>>> "zoom-original".
>> I have no idea what you mean.  The "unthemed" icons are HiColor and
>>  KDE refuses to provide HiColor icons.  So, there are no "unthemed"
>>  icons to fallback to.
> 
> "unthemed" as in "default Oxygen icons" as opposed to "the icons of 
> the 3rd party theme that the user has selected".

Sorry, but "unthemed" means HiColor.  All other icon themes have a theme
(Ah Ha! a tautology).

>>> Let me tell you clearly that (a) is unacceptable for me, and will
>>>  happen over my suspended SVN account. If kdeartwork efforts are 
>>> going to stall because you can't live with my decision, then so 
>>> be it. If you manage to work productively with the artists and 
>>> coders in my place and push me from my oh so high throne as 
>>> naming coordinator, then so be it.
>> OK, then do your job.  Coordinator does not mean making arbitrary 
>> decisions.  Actually, I must ask: who gave you this job?
> 
> I would assume that the old open source motto "who does the work 
> decides" applies.

NO!  I do not believe in that at all.  And neither do you.  If I do the
work of renaming the icons in KDEArtWork, then I get to decide on what
to name them.  I would not make such an absurd assertion.

The KDE project is too large for constructive anarchy to work anymore.
We need design and planing which seems to be in conflict with that motto.

> I implemented fallbacks in KIconLoader,

I presume that you mean that you implemented the icon naming standard.

> researched in lots of places how other people name their icons,

Not a really good idea if you assign a high rank to this.

> asked in #tango for advice on various naming issues that I 
> encountered, and together with Pino Toscano renamed the majority of 
> KDE icons to something that works and is compatible to the naming 
> spec in effect and vision.
> 
> As of my knowledge, the artists team trusts me on naming matters, and
>  I got "this job" because there were no disagreements, or 
> disagreements that could be solved satisfactory for all people 
> involved.

IIUC, you appointed yourself to this job.  So, you are NOT my boss, we
are peers.

> That is obviously not the case this time, so yeah, if you insist on 
> your opinion as I insist on mine in this case then we need a referee.
> 
OOPS, you said the magic word: 'opinion'.  I take great offense when
people confuse questions of opinion and questions of fact.  Deductive
reasoning is not an opinion.  You do not counter deductive reasoning by
dismissing it as an opinion and just saying that you have a different
opinion.  If you want me to respect what you say, you are going to need
to tell me why my reasoning is wrong.

> Also, this decision is not arbitrary. I listed good reasons why we 
> should not have a "zoom" icon, and the fact that you don't agree with
>  those still does not make them arbitrary.

Unfortunately, your reasons are not good ones; your decision appears
very arbitrary.  However, you made some points which should be
considered.  I am going to try to rethink this and try to find other
possible schemes for FitHeight & FitWidth.

>> Obviously, there are two possibilities:
>> 
>> 1.	We are peers and my ideas should be held equally with yours.
> 
> Equally, yes. But that does also not mean that you can force your 
> will by mailing your same arguments again and again. We clearly 
> disagree and I don't believe that we can get any further with 
> arguments because both our positions are clear. So,
> 
> a) Let someone else decide on this issue after having read this 
> thread. b) Let someone else decide on me being the official icon 
> naming maintainer.
> 
> Who should decide on stuff like this? No idea really. I'm quite sure 
> that from the current KDE developers, I've been involved most with 
> the naming spec and surrounding documents and people, so there's no 
> clear authority in KDE that we could refer to on this issue.
> 
> I propose to ask dobey (as naming spec maintainer) for the "official"
>  stance on "zoom" vs. "page-zoom", and when that's resolved, let 
> other KDE devs with good knowledge of icon naming (Pino Toscano, 
> Jonathan Riddell, Danny Allen ...) decide on how to resolve conflicts
>  like this the next time.

Are they knowledgeable in finite mathematics and set theory?

>> 2.	We have hierarchal management and I I need to talk to your 
>> immediate supervisor about this.
> 
> As far as I know KDE procedures, each module in the KDE SVN has a 
> module maintainer who is entitled to decide on conflicts like this. 
> According to 
> http://techbase.kde.org/Projects/Release_Team#Coordinator_List this 
> would be Oliver Goffart for kdebase/runtime, where KDE core icons 
> belong to.

This presents a problem since the icons that need to be renamed are in
KDEArtWork.  IIUC, there is no maintainer for the icons in KDEArtWork
although I guess that I have been doing that job.

> We should refer to him (and possibly kde-core-devel, as you already 
> pissed off most people on kde-artists) in order to resolve this 
> issue.

I don't think that that is correct although you might want to think
that.  Didn't someone complement me on the good job I was doing --
regarding trying to develop an icon data base.  Sorry that you were
weren't willing to go along with that.

This should be resolvable by reason if we both are willing to engage in
reasoned discussion.  I have to say that it appears to me that you are
not.  I presented an almost tautological argument as to why "viewmag"
should be renamed "zoom".  You have said nothing to refute that argument
instead you have made statements which are basically non-sequiturs.  And
I have to say that some of your arguments appear to be arguments after
the fact -- rationalizations which you came up with to try to defend
your position after you arrived at it.

I still do not understand your reasoning.  Your explanation for why you
want to call an icon "page-zoom" makes no sense.  There is no logical
reasoning to it.  The most important issue is whether there are other
icons named: "page-*" in the naming standard?

I do not want you to think or claim that I am set on only one possible 
scheme for naming these icons.  There are probably multiple solutions 
here, but we must arrive at one that is logically consistent.  I do 
insist that any solution must be logical

You mentioned a lot of things that you have done and considered, but you
have not listed logical consistency among them.  The naming standard and
logical consistency are the two most important things.  This means that
we need to consider finite mathematics, set theory, and tree diagrams in
considering what to name icons.  And now you say that you don't want
fall back to the root of the tree to occur.  ARGH!

-- 
JRT
______________________________________________________________________________
kde-artists@kde.org |  https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-artists
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]