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

List:       koffice-devel
Subject:    Re: [PATCH] Icons
From:       James Richard Tyrer <tyrerj () acm ! org>
Date:       2005-05-19 19:00:43
Message-ID: 428CE25B.10807 () acm ! org
[Download RAW message or body]

David Faure wrote:
> On Thursday 19 May 2005 07:38, James Richard Tyrer wrote:
> 
>> I have posted the patch for the Makefile.am files:
>> 
>> http://home.earthlink.net/~tyrerj/kde/Koffice-icons/ko-icon.patch.bz2
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> I don't understand. Jonathan renamed the icons correctly (with hi or
>  cr prefixes),

There appear to be many HiColor icons (i.e. unthemed 24 bit color icons)
that have "cr" as the first two letters of the file name and are
therefore installed as Crystal.

> why do you want to create subdirectories "hicolor" and "crystalsvg" 
> for them?

This appears to be the standard practice.  Specifically, some KOffice
apps have "crystalsvg" subdirectories for icons, which implies that
there MUST also be a "hicolor" directory for the HiColor icons.  Other
KOffice apps have the HiColor and Crystal icons in the same directories.
  They should all be one way or the other.  I came across this when I
tried to make a script which would move icons improperly named Crystal
to HiColor.  This would work best if there were a consistent directory
structure.

> That's not necessary

You are correct that it is not necessary, but KDE seems to do it that
way, and it appears to be easier to maintain this way.  But, what is
clearly necessary is for all the KOffice apps to have the same directory
structure.

> (and is too risky to get wrong a week before the final release).

I agree that if the release is in a week that this should wait.  But,
the icon mess needs to be fixed ASAP in all apps, not just KOffice apps.
And, refactoring the directory structure for KOffice apps so it is
consistent is a good idea

> Doesn't everything work fine as it is now?

Yes and NO, it works OK (although not optimum) the way it is except for
the fact that HiColor icons are missing.  I have no idea why someone
thought that it was necessary to remove the HiColor icons from the
current branches since KDE policy requires them:

	http://developer.kde.org/~larrosa/iconthemes.html

Despite these clearly stated guidelines, HiColor icons were removed or
renamed to Crystal.  This needs to be undone.

And now the FreeDesktop standards require them:

	http://www.freedesktop.org/Standards/icon-theme-spec

The only possible problem would occur if the system already had a system
  installed Crystal icon and KOffice installed a HiColor icon as Crystal
in the apps: "$(kde_datadir)/<appname>/icons/crystalsvg" directory that
would override the Crystal icon.

In general, icons should be installed correctly according to their actual
theme.  I see no advantage to calling unthemed icons CrystalSVG (or any
other theme).

IAC, it is not too late to add back the HiColor icons for the apps (and
add them for the apps that never had them).  These will not all be in
the correct locations in my tarball: "ko-app-hi.tar.bz2" because the
directory structure is not consistent in all KOffice apps.

-- 
JRT
_______________________________________________
koffice-devel mailing list
koffice-devel@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/koffice-devel
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]