Icon-naming-spec names help... (I am a bit confused)
dobey.pwns at gmail.com
Mon Sep 22 08:13:02 PDT 2008
On Mon, 2008-09-22 at 11:03 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-09-22 at 10:56 -0400, Rodney Dawes wrote:
> > Hi,
> > On Mon, 2008-09-22 at 16:41 +0200, Stephan Arts wrote:
> > > gnome-fs-blockdev
> > > gnome-fs-fifo
> > > gnome-fs-socket
> > > gnome-fs-chardev
> > > gnome-fs-regular
> > >
> > >
> > > As you can see, I found replacements for the top 7 icons pretty
> > > easilly. But the last 7 confuse me, which icon-names should be used
> > > for that?
> > There are no replacements for these in the spec. A "regular file" icon
> > doesn't make sense, as every file should have a mime type. It was used
> > in nautilus for text file previews, and we have text-x-preview in
> > gnome-icon-theme for that, but it is not in the spec, and I don't think
> > it should be.
> Thats just really not true. A generic file icon makes a ton of sense.
> You don't always want to represent mime information.
Please provide a use-case where it makes sense. The ONLY case I've seen
where it makes sense, is for the text preview in nautilus, and the text
preview is not at all useful unless you get a 300+ dpi screen and use
icons that are >= 128px in size. And since the icon theme can't specify
what font metrics to use for it, there's also styling issues with it.
The only thing the icon theme can specify, is the rectangular area to
stick the "preview text" in.
But if you have some other viable use case, I would love to hear it.
More information about the xdg