New icon names approval: "view-fit-*

[Jakob Petsovits]

On Friday, 13. July 2007, James Richard Tyrer wrote:
> Yes, that looks like a good possibility even though the names
> (zoom-fit-*-page) do not appear, at first glance, technically correct --
> they make sense only when compared to the other names (zoom-fit-*).  So,
> perhaps if they are going to be KDE Only icons, they should be called:
>
> 	zoom-fit-width-kde
> 	zoom-fit-height-kde
> 	zoom-fit-best-kde
>
> since this would conform to the spec -- a brand is added last in all
> cases although I think that they had something slightly different in
> mind for the meaning of 'brand'.

No, I don't think that's a good idea. Icons should really only be named *-kde 
when they are actually KDE specific, as in "adds KDE branding while the 
meaning stays the same". This is not the case here, it is no brand but rather 
a more specialized version of the original icon, thus it should say what it 
is, not where it comes from.

In short, I think *-page is much more appropriate than *-kde here.
Either way, it doesn't make a difference for the specification request:

> IAC, this is not an issue for the spec.  If we follow this idea then we
> would be asking only for:
>
> 	zoom-fit-width
> 	zoom-fit-height
>
> and a correction of the name of "zoom-best-fit" to "zoom-fit-best" --
> there is no "zoom-best-<something>" and an icon named: "zoom-fit" would
> be legal as a fall back.

Right, that's exactly what I would ask for. Your take, dobey?

> And, is the height icon isn't thought to be popular, we could drop that
> from the request.

I object. While fit-height is not as widely used as the other two, I think it 
still makes sense to include it. Not having it limits the possible use to 
document viewers only, and even there only to pages in portrait layout.
What about image viewing/editing apps? What about any graphical visualization 
that needs fit-height?

I don't think it makes sense to make those apps have application-specific 
fit-height icons, especially given the minimal effort for icon designers to 
draw a fit-height icon when they already did the fit-width one.
Please include fit-height as well, for consistency and foresight.

Thanks,
  Jakob