xdg-icon (Was: [Portland] RE: Portland: xdg-utils)

[Bastian, Waldo]

Xdg-icon is your friendly helper tool that codifies what the
freedesktop.org Icon theme specification says applications should be
doing. Or in other words it helps you get your icons installed under
/usr/share/icons in the Right Way [tm].

It's very well possible that your application manages to get by without
installing anything under /usr/share/icons. In that case you don't need
to use xdg-icon either.

In the following two cases xdg-icon/Icon theme spec is useful:

1) Installing items on the desktop or in the application menu: The Icon
entry in .desktop files can contain either a absolute path to an icon or
an icon name. If you provide an icon name instead of an absolute path
you will need to install the corresponding icon according to the Icon
theme spec. The advantage of using an icon name instead of an absolute
path is that you will be able to provide icons in different sizes and
that the icon can be themed in different styles.

2) Installing additional file type descriptions: If your application
introduces a new MIME type, your application will also need to provide a
file icon for that MIME type for use in file managers. Such icon needs
to be installed according to th Icon theme spec.

As far as creeping featuritis goes, all of the above has been applicable
since 2002 (when the first Icon theme spec was written) if not before
(when KDE was essentially doing the same already)

Waldo Bastian
Linux Client Architect - Client Linux Foundation Technology
Channel Platform Solutions Group
Intel Corporation - http://www.intel.com/go/linux
OSDL DTL Tech Board Chairman

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Jeremy White [mailto:jwhite at codeweavers.com]
>Sent: Thursday, June 01, 2006 5:53 AM
>To: Bastian, Waldo
>Cc: lsb-f2f at freestandards.org; portland at lists.freedesktop.org
>Subject: Re: [Portland] RE: Portland: xdg-utils
>
>Hi Waldo,
>
>> See http://www.svn.net/bastian/xdg-utils.html
>>
>>
>>>Note that the current approach requires an application to make
multiple
>>>calls to xdg-icon, xdg-desktop and xdg-menu. An alternative approach
>
>I'm sorry; I've lost a part of the thread.
>
>I see now that there is a bug 7012 that claims that xdg-icon
>is necessary.
>
>When did xdg-icon become necessary?  And why?
>
>(/me writes then deletes angry rant about creaping featuritis
>as the disease destroying Desktop Linux  :-/).
>
>Cheers,
>
>Jeremy