Icon theme spec on the website
dobey.pwns at gmail.com
Thu Sep 25 13:01:52 PDT 2008
On Thu, 2008-09-25 at 15:38 +0100, Richard Hughes wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-09-24 at 11:30 +0200, Stephan Arts wrote:
> > I noticed system-suspend system-hibernate and system-reboot are
> > missing from 0.8.90, is that is CVS?
> I've given up on the icon-naming-spec, it's just too hard for developers
> to get dobey to add new icons without a massive flame-war.
It's not that hard. You just want to make it hard. When I asked for more
details in support of adding the system-software-installer icon (which
you simply *demanded* be included, rather than subtly proposed), all I
got back was you ranting about how *hard* it is to get an icon in the
spec. I'm sorry, but if asking for supporting evidence is somehow the
start to a flame war, then something is seriously wrong, and it's not
on my end.
> I think the crux of the problem is that some people see the icon naming
> specification as a shared specification so that applications can have
> shared icon names, and other people see it as the minimum list of icons
> you have to draw in a theme.
No. The problem is that there are people who expect the spec to be a
list of icons to use, and that's it. And what's what you're expecting it
to be. The simple fact is, and I have stated it several times since I
first wrote the spec, is that it is meant to be both a minimal list of
icon names that need to be provided to theme the *DESKTOP, as well as to
provide the guidelines for naming icons as extensions to those in the
spec. All applications may not necessarily be part of the desktop. And
just as impossible as it is for applications to always depend on the
absolute base set of icons at all times, it is impossible for any single
spec to provide a list of all possible icon names.
The real problem is that too many applications have too many icons that
they don't actually need, but the developers are so insistent that they
must be there.
I have no problem adding useful, good icons to the spec. But I won't
just sit around all day taking your *DEMANDS* and obeying them. I don't
have a lot of time to maintain the spec. I don't get to hack on whatever
I feel like all day, and get paid to do so. Were I to, perhaps I could
concentrate more time on the spec. Until then, I don't have time to
deal with demands. If you want to make rational proposals, and aren't
opposed to having rational discussions in order to provide supporting
arguments, and to deal with supporting counter-arguments, then I am by
all means open to responding to those e-mails and updating the spec
to include icons, given that rational discussion suggests it best to
Also, it has always been the intent to create addendum specifications
which list standardized icon names for other specific genres of
applications. For example, I have already started on a standardized
list of device icon names, though it is only a .txt file currently,
and not Docbook. There is absolutely no reason this can't also be done
for "Development Tools" or "Graphics Tools" as well. The only thing
preventing that, is nobody else wants to take the time to do it, and
I don't have the time to do it.
More information about the xdg