[kde-artists] Icon Naming: animations/process-working, & animations/process-idle

James Richard Tyrer tyrerj at acm.org
Fri Jul 6 07:57:43 PDT 2007

Rodney Dawes wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-07-05 at 19:27 -0700, James Richard Tyrer wrote:
>> Jakob Petsovits wrote:
>>> On Wednesday, 4. July 2007, James Richard Tyrer wrote:
>>>> I note that the Icon Naming spec includes:
>>>> animations/process-idle animations/process-working
>>> Er, no, the naming spec does not include process-idle. Instead,
>>> it says in the description of process-working:
>>> "The first frame of the animation should be used for the resting
>>> state of the animation."
>>> So, no need for process-idle, and especially not in animations.
>> You are correct that it isn't in the spec (yet?).  It is in the
>> Tango icons.  Part of the problem, I guess.  Tango and the Icon
>> Naming spec aren't 100% the same.
> Everything in Tango isn't in the spec, and isn't meant to go in the 
> spec.

The Tango group might not agree with that, but anyway.  It certainly is
starting to look like this isn't going to be simple.

> The process-idle icon is there so we can support the current spinner
> implementations in GNOME. They expect the idle image to be separate
> from the animation image.

Yes, that also appears to be the way that Firefox works.  It also seems
to be how the Oxygen icon developer wants to do it.

> The spec calls for the idle image to be the first frame of the
> animation.

Unfortunately, KDE doesn't fit with either of these.  That is, KDE
doesn't have an idle image.  It cycles through all of the images in the
PNG.  So, we are going to have to change something in the code either
way. :-(  However, I think that it would be easiest to conform to the
current GNOME system with a separate icon for idle since this would make
the: "process-working" icon the same as our current icon, and we
wouldn't have to use the "process-idle" icon.


More information about the xdg mailing list