Rodney Dawes wrote On 01/16/07 14:14,:

>On Tue, 2007-01-16 at 13:21 +0000, Bill Haneman wrote:
>  
>
>>I have to disagree here.  While it's a nice idea with some utility, and 
>>Andy is to be thanked for doing the work, it simply cannot deliver the 
>>goal of readily differentiable monochrome icons across the desktop - the 
>>stock graphics are just too 'busy'.  There's really no substitute for 
>>purpose-built bold, monochrome icons.
>>    
>>
>
>This is just not true. The way the automation works, is that it doesn't
>use all of the detail of the original icon. It does add a little more
>work to creating the icons, but not as much as actually creating an
>entirely separate theme. What you do is use certain names for elements
>in the icon, and the automation code ignores other elements and only
>shows the appropriate paths, for the type of a11y icon needed.
>
>You really should look into what he's doing and how he's doing it,
>before you just write it off completely.
>  
>

There's a difference between this approach of successive detail, and the 
approach of purpose-built icons.  I stand by my previous statement.

Bill

>-- dobey
>
>
>  
>
_______________________________________________
desktop-devel-list mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list

Reply via email to