[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:       Kenneth Wimer <wimer () kde ! org>
Date:       2008-05-26 12:36:59
Message-ID: 200805261437.00164.wimer () kde ! org
[Download RAW message or body]

On Monday 26 May 2008 14:14:24 James Richard Tyrer wrote:
> Kenneth Wimer wrote:
> > On Monday 26 May 2008 12:27:13 James Richard Tyrer wrote:
> >> 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).
>
> I do hope that nobody took this remark seriously.
>
> > And we have had this conversation before. There is no such thing as
> > an unthemed theme. Every piece of artwork has some style/look which
> > can be defined.
>
> The icon theme spec defines HiColor as unthemed.  I agree that that is a
> poor choice of words.  However, the meaning is clear that HiColor icons
> are to be generic.  This is not true of other icon themes where the
> intent is to have a definite style.  So referring to Oxygen as
> 'unthemed' is nonsense.  Being the default does not make it unthemed.

I never refered to Oxygen as unthemed. I am saying that there is no such thing 
as "unthemed". HiColor is a place for third party apps to put their icons.

> > Saying otherwise is simply silly and shows that one has little
> > experience as an artist.
>
> I wouldn't say that.  But, yes, generic is in itself a style.

I disagree. Making bland looking icons which might or might not fit with other 
icon styles might be called generic but that is a loose term artistically and 
makes little sense. In any case making such a theme is simply a waste of time 
as we already have enough boring and/or outdated/ugly themes. Polluting the 
theme that we define as default with such icons goes against the whole point 
of picking a default theme.

> > I support Jakob 100%. His work has been invaulable.
>
> Yes, and could have been even more valuable if he had documented his work.

Well, if that is the worst thing he has done I'll still buy him a beer next 
time I see him :-)

> > All things considered this is a minor issue. Let's not make a
> > mountain out of a mole hill.
>
> There is an important and very general question here.  This issue is
> whether or not an icon name tree should have an icon for fallback.  It
> seemed obvious to me that it should and he is *totally* opposed to that
> and his reason appears to be that he doesn't like the idea.

While I totally agree with the ideas presented in the spec (having fallback 
icons in a naming tree) I think that in this case it makes very little sense. 
I do not see any decent way of falling back from "zoom-*" to simply "zoom". 
Any case in which "zoom-*" falls back it will present useless icons as when 
an app uses "zoom-*" they usually use several. Showing the same icon for 
different metaphors is, in this case and in my opinion, not useful.

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