On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 5:46 PM, Sergiu Dumitriu <[email protected]> wrote: > -0; read below. > > The main problems I see are: > - The icons are only 16x16. Scaling them does not yield good results. > - They are not comprehensive. I'm sure there are some icons that we need > and which are not available in there.
I think that their purpose is not to be self-comprehensive, they should be used along with text. > So, I'm not against using Silk icons (we already do in some places), but > I don't think we should use it alone. We still need other icons, be > they from Tango, Crystal or custom made. I'm not saying that we should forbid to use icons from other libraries, just that we should encourage the use of silk for all small icons by providing them in our webapp. If we don't agree I'll just put icons for my current needs but I think it's not the best option. > A better idea would be to try to define a guideline L&F, and whenever > doing an application, try to reuse from the existing icons as much as > possible, and to add icons from the same set when some icons are already > available. We need that too. On a related topic Laurent and I have started to work on pre-defined styles (ie: css classes) for usual layout needs (tables, pages lists, tabs, columns, etc). See http://incubator.myxwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Crumbs/Tables for example. JV. _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
