[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 13:13:34
Message-ID: 483AB77E.3050000 () acm ! org
[Download RAW message or body]

Kenneth Wimer wrote:
> 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.

No, JP did.

> I am saying that there is no such thing as "unthemed".

I agree with that, but the spec does say that HiColor icons should be
"unthemed".  "Generic" would be a much better choice of words.

> HiColor is a place for third party apps to put their icons.

Yes, but remember that Socrates' cat is not a dog.

>>> 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.

Yes, we should have a default theme with a definite style.  Bland icons 
belong in HiColor.

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

The documentation would greatly facilitate renaming the icons in 
KDEArtWork and also facilitate development.

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

I think that he made some other errors (as did those that wrote the 
standard), but I have more important things to worry about first.

>>> 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.
> 
You are _absolutely_ correct.  We should always have all of the 
different icons in all icon themes. (LOLROF)  What we are discussing is 
what will happen when that ideal isn't achieved.  It would not be a good 
thing to have the same icon for ZoomIn & ZoomOut.  But is it better to 
have the same "zoom" icon for both rather than having the unknown icon 
for both of them?  Having the 'zoom' icon would give you a general idea 
of what the toolbar buttons were for while the unknown icon gives no 
information at all.  NOTE: this is a case that would probably never 
happen, but we seem to be using it as an example.  This fallback will 
likely happen with one of the more uncommon icons and/or ones that are 
not in the standard.

So, while I don't think that it is an absolute requirement, it does seem 
like a good idea to have an icon for the root of a tree of icon names 
(e.g. zoom & view) especially when these icons have other uses besides 
the fallback function.  Also a good idea if that tree contains KDE icons 
that are not in the standard.

-- 
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]