Multiple DeskTops, HiColor theme, standardized icon names, & menu icons
coolo at novell.com
Thu Jun 29 18:39:31 EEST 2006
Am Donnerstag, 29. Juni 2006 17:16 schrieb Rodney Dawes:
> On Thu, 2006-06-29 at 17:09 +0200, Stephan Kulow wrote:
> > Am Donnerstag, 29. Juni 2006 16:42 schrieb Rodney Dawes:
> > > Then why do we have a specification that says where to put icons at
> > > all? Why isn't this all just part of the loader documentation?
> > Because we expect all desktops to show menus and mimetype icons
> > and for those the provided icons have to be in places where _everyone_
> > looks. I would call them public icons. For private icons there is no such
> > need IMO.
> You (like everyone else seems to be doing) are confusing the term
> private, with static. For static icons in an app, of course there is no
> need. Those icons are static and part of the application's data section
> in the binary, or in a private directory with hardcoded paths. But for
> an application that wishes to have themable icons, this is not feasible.
> If one is to run Evolution under KDE for example, do you expect
> Evolution to not have any of its icons available? Wouldn't you want the
> icons to perhaps be in the same style as the icon theme you're using at
> the time, when you run it?
So your interest to make it possible for icon theme authors to provide themed
evolution icons? That would make sense to me, but that wasn't said yet.
Because KDE in itself doesn't care what evolution does with its icons.
More information about the xdg