Calum Benson wrote: > > On 14 Aug 2008, at 16:34, Dave Miner wrote: >>> >> >> I tend to agree with this reasoning, and am not inclined to push for >> copy-paste engineering in themes anymore than I would anywhere else. I >> would ask, though, that space considerations be a part of the >> calculation in constructing the themes and dependency chains. Also, any >> thoughts about Glynn's suggestion of not shipping so many icon variants? >> For example, the 192x192 nimbus icons are 4+ MB all by themselves... > > Yep, I'd certainly have no issues with splitting out the 96x96 sizes and > upwards. Icons bigger than 48x48 are rarely needed on most desktops, > but we might want to keep the next size up (72x72) just in case-- they > might be called into play on big hi-res displays. >
How big/hi-res are we talking about to need 72x72? It's a meg, after all. Dave _______________________________________________ indiana-discuss mailing list indiana-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/indiana-discuss
