[ Wading into this discussion a day late against my better judgment.. :-) ]
I'd like to add three things to this discussion. 1) Whether or not anyone likes it, the icon spec does imply a default theme. The spec simply specifies that "hicolor theme look neutral", which gives no guidance as to what to really draw. An app installing an icon has to target some visual style -- waving our hands on this point doesn't make it magically happen. 2) Building off that, if ISVs are going to use the icon spec at all, we need to give them a target. Asking them to target all known themes is totally unreasonable; asking them to choose a style for their default icons is also untenable. I would totally expect them to throw their hands up in disgust, as there's nothing valid they can do here. The tango project, at least, seems to be trying to solve this (very hard) problem. If we (the various desktop projects) insist that icon theming is a good thing to do, then we need to answer this. If we can't come to a default style, or limit the extent of icon names, we should probably decide that icon theming was a bad idea for 3rd party app writers and leave it to desktops only. 3) Least importantly, the GNOME project hasn't agreed to switch to it either. It hasn't been proposed on any GNOME mailing lists, and I seriously doubt that we'd switch to it by default, unless a really compelling case was made. Additionally, kudos to the tango people for tackling the naming problem. I hope everyone agrees that this is important. Reading through the previous mails, it seems that there's consensus there -- it's a pity they didn't get their messages straight. Thanks, -Jonathan
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ xdg mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xdg
