Icon naming issue
kwwii at bootsplash.org
Fri Apr 27 13:34:47 PDT 2007
On Friday 27 April 2007 21:58:27 Kenneth Wimer wrote:
> On Friday 27 April 2007 21:39:48 James Richard Tyrer wrote:
> > Patryk Zawadzki wrote:
> > > On 4/27/07, James Richard Tyrer <tyrerj at acm.org> wrote:
> > >> As I see it, the problem is that we don't have a proper set of
> > >> HiColor icons. Someone moved all the existing HiColor icons to
> > >> KDEClassic and for some reason all new HiColor icons were removed.
> > >> Then some HiColor icons were renamed CrystalSVG and some
> > >> CrystalSVG icons were renamed HiColor. Now GNOME seems to have
> > >> emulated us and removed their HiColor icons as well. To me this is
> > >> a real mess.
> > >
> > > Why is this bad? Apps drop their default icons to hicolor so these
> > > are picked up regardless of the theme in use.
> > HiColor is not "default", it is fallback.
> > > Why should any theme put its icons there? If a theme is complete, no
> > > icons will ever need to be searched for in hicolor. If it is not
> > > complete, it should provide its own list of parent themes (e.g.
> > > "based on CrystalSVG") and the missing icons should be picked from
> > > the parent theme, so again, no need to search hicolor.
> > While I half agree with you, the point here is the standard:
> Again, semantics...
> > http://standards.freedesktop.org/icon-theme-spec/icon-theme-spec-latest.h
> >tm l
Sorry for saying this was a case of misunderstanding, it is not...as you
mentioned in this link the spec says:
' In order to have a place for third party applications to install their icons
there should always exist a theme called "hicolor" '
I am not sure how you interpret this to mean that hicolor should be a full
icon theme on it's own.
More information about the xdg