On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 7:41 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton
<dennis.hamil...@acm.org> wrote:
> I have no objection to the coloring of the icons.
>
> I object to the use of an "ODF" tag on them with no indication that these are
> for implementation-specific file associations. I also failed to include the
> illustrative image from my last note. I will correct that.
>
I don't how familiar you are with how Windows handles file
associations and icons, but there is not direct connection between the
application and the icon. So no icons are *necessarily*
implementation-specific. But it does require extra coordination among
multiple implementations if they are to use the same icons.
In particular, the file extensions is associated with a ID in the
registry for the file type. There is then a separate registry for
mapping the file type to the default icon. And then there are one or
more application registry keys that associate actions ("verbs") with
an application.
That is what allows you to have multiple handles for "open with..." in
Windows. It also allows a different applications to each handle
different verbs, such as one handling print, another view and another
edit. Of course, only one application can be the default handler for
when you double click on the icon.
So if each application installs its own icons, then of course icons
will be application-specific. Needs no ghost from the grave to tell
us that. But we could just as well have multiple apps use the same
icons for the same file types.
-Rob
> - Dennis
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rob Weir [mailto:robw...@apache.org]
> Sent: Friday, December 16, 2011 16:30
> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: old colored vs new monochrome icons
>
> On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 7:13 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton
> <dennis.hamil...@acm.org> wrote:
>> Rob,
>>
>> As far as I am concerned, unless those icons are issued by the OASIS ODF
>> Adoption TC, in a way that they are usable with anyone's ODF-supporting file
>> associations, that discussion doesn't count. (If the OASIS ODF Adoption TC
>> did something like that, that would be cool and consistent with the notion
>> of making ODF support visible.)
>>
>
> Honestly, I have no idea what you're talking about at this point.
>
> Do you have any objections with the proposal that has been made about
> coloring the icons? Or do you have a different set of icons that you
> want to counter-propose with?
>
>
> -Rob
