On Monday 07 May 2007, James Richard Tyrer <tyrerj@acm.org> wrote 
about 'Size of "Medium" icons':
> When a 128x128 pixel SVG image is
> rendered to 22x22, it is always going to render poorly while with 24x24
> boundaries in the image on a 16 pixel grid will be pixel perfect.

I thought the whole point of SVG what to be resolution independent and 
infinitely scalable.  To me the whole idea of a 128x128 pixel SVG image sounds 
wrong.

Ignoring that, using 24x24 instead of 22x22 will reduce the amount of 
artifacts that occur in an image that is designed to rasterize @ 128x128 but 
it won't eliminate them entirely, so some amount of images will have to be 
reworked for smaller sizes anyway, right?

-- 
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.                     ,= ,-_-. =. 
bss03@volumehost.net                      ((_/)o o(\_))
ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy           `-'(. .)`-' 
http://iguanasuicide.org/                      \_/