Hi Paulo, hi Bernhard, all! Am Sonntag, den 06.03.2011, 20:35 -0300 schrieb Paulo José: > On 06-03-2011 19:53, Bernhard Dippold wrote: > > Hi Paulo, all, > > > > thanks for keeping this running! > > [...] > > We discussed the shadow during the first few iterations and came to > > the conclusion not to use it. > Yeah, I think I actually missed this part. I'm sorry about that. > > > I don't remember the reason exactly, but I think that some OS add > > their own shadow to the icons on the desktop? And we didn't want to > > waste precious pixel...
Yes, for the 16px icons we wanted to use the maximum size. And for the larger icons, we were unsure what platforms will add an own shadow that might "interfere" with our own one. But ... > Since the icons are just for toolbar usage and they don't go to desktop, > the shadow problem doesn't a actual problem. Do I got it correctly? I > based mainly in the Tango icons along the application main toolbar, some > of them have shadow, others not. If they conform to the Tango guidelines, they do have some shadow (although the very small icons do have very subtle ones). http://tango.freedesktop.org/Tango_Icon_Theme_Guidelines#Lighting One thing that might be helpful is to have a look at the icon theme and the source data itself. Should be available here: http://tango.freedesktop.org/releases/tango-icon-theme-0.8.90.tar.gz > > [...] > > So if I understand it correctly, we need 24x24 px icons already > > including one empty pixel at every side. > > > > This might be dependent on operating system and distribution, > > otherwise I don't know why Galaxy mentions 26x26, but perhaps Thorsten > > can enlighten us.... > I got it. Well, if we take the shadows off, we will decrease the icons > size by 2 pixels. Since they are 26px (24+2px) large, this action makes > them 24px (22+2px) large. Then they will have 1px empty around, the > correctly size. We'll not need remake them. :-) > > But I'm not sure if the other Tango icons on the screenshoot included in > this page > http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design/LibreOffice_Initial_Icons#Feedback_and_Issues > > actually is 22+2px large... When I was editing these icons, I used the > other Tango icons as base, and I'm almost sure they are actually 26px > large (24+2px) large. I'm a bit tired at the moment (not because of you, but because it is already very late here ...), so it might be wrong what I state. As far as I understand, the bigger icons in LibreOffice are 26px large. Since LibreOffice can be used on different platform, we don't always conform to the standards on the target platforms ... thus, when using LibreOffice together with the Tango icons, I think they added 2px to fill the remaining space. Galaxy states 26px icons "large size": http://ui.openoffice.org/VisualDesign/OOo_galaxy.html Gnome states 24px icons for the toolbars: http://library.gnome.org/devel/hig-book/stable/icons-types.html.en > A question just now came to me: I didn't go too deep in this subtitle, > so is it actually defined if we'll change to Galaxy icons? Oh, the developers just changed it to the Tango icon set - but (as far as I know) the Galaxy set is still shipped and therefore might also need some icons. However, we might not need to be perfect in any case ;-) And concerning your great icon comparison [1] - some personal comments: Proposals 1 and 3 are close to perfect! The only minor proposal is to make the shadows a bit more subtle ... I cannot really say why, it is just the first impression every time I look at those. Well done, Paulo! Thanks for your work ... seems that we need to ship them soon ;-) Although your recent blog posting asked for some more feedback, I think it's better to get some sleep ... and come back with a fresh mind. Cheers, Christoph [1] http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/File:Toolbar-Mimetype-Icons-comparison.png -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to design+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/design/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
