That's an excellent point. If you want to, I can add the pages in the wiki. Please let me know which other areas are needed.<br><br>Christopher<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">2007/12/12, Rodney Dawes <<a href="mailto:dobey.pwns@gmail.com">
dobey.pwns@gmail.com</a>>:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">While having a list of icons that are not in the base specification is
<br>great, I don't think we should list icons as a per-desktop thing. The<br>goal of icon themes, and the naming spec in particular, is that we can<br>use the same icons on all desktops.<br><br>I would much prefer the addendum specifications to be targeted at more
<br>specific tasks, or goals. For instance, the Device names addendum I've<br>already started on is to list all the icons for specific devices, so<br>that we can more accurately represent devices that are connected to the
<br>computer, in the desktops. Some examples of task-based addendum are:<br><br>- Programming<br>- Graphic Design<br>- Data Management<br>- Device Icons<br>- Audio Production<br>- Video Production<br>- Video Game Emulation
<br><br>All these represent needs the various desktops have. I think it would be<br>a waste to have to duplicate these lists over and over for every desktop<br>out there that gets put on the wiki. So can we please change to using
<br>this method of icon classification? I think it better suits the purposes<br>of FreeDesktop.org and the Icon Naming specification, as well as what<br>the goal of this proposed process.<br><br>-- dobey<br><br><br>On Wed, 2007-12-12 at 11:27 +0100, Christopher R. Parr wrote:
<br>> Apparently anyone can create pages. See<br>> <a href="http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Specifications/icon-naming-spec/desktop-icon-lists?action=show">http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Specifications/icon-naming-spec/desktop-icon-lists?action=show
</a><br>><br>> Christopher<br><br><br><br><br></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>Windows = a 64 bit rewrite for a 32 bit extension to a 16 bit GUI on an<br>8 bit OS written for a 4 bit architecture by a 2 bit company who can't
<br>stand 1 bit of competition.<br><br><br><a href="http://crparr.net">crparr.net</a>, <a href="http://aglug.net">aglug.net</a>, <a href="http://glass-theme.net">glass-theme.net</a>, <a href="http://forums.glass-theme.net">
forums.glass-theme.net</a>,<br><a href="http://lila-center.info">lila-center.info</a>, <a href="http://forums.lila-center.info">forums.lila-center.info</a>, <a href="http://parrix.net">parrix.net</a>