[Graphics] Re: new gis theme and common repository

[Robert Szczepanek]

Steven M. Ottens pisze:

> We need to create a list of all needed icons and their metaphors, similar to the tange page [2]
> 
> The list on the wiki [3]:  is a good starting point. I suggest to start with defining a basic iconset (for instance without the advanced GIS functionality from GRASS). Discuss metaphors and once an agreement is reached put the metaphor behind the icon-name.
> Finally once icons are pouring in we can show them in the same table, having columns for 16x16, 22x22, 32x32 and scalable so one can see at once if that icon is available.
+1

Definitely we should slowly start filling-up content, even to test workflow.

1. Request for icon on trac
OR short mail to graphics at osgeo '[new-icon] in caption'?

2. If most agree on metaphor...
Note to wiki

Our problem is that we have already some themes and some compromise is
important.

3. Drawing SVG
->SVN
->wiki (sample renders)

We need sort of 'icon status' [1][2] on wiki.

> Tango uses in its releases:
> 16x16/actions/address-book-new.png
> 22x22/actions/address-book-new.png
> 32x32/actions/address-book-new.png
> scalable/actions/addrress-book-new.svg

Why this is in such order? For me it's easier to add many
short-and-easy-name subfolders with size (22x22, 16x16). Not copy
structure (like 'actions') which can change in time.
actions/16x16/address-book-new.png
actions/22x22/address-book-new.png
actions/32x32/address-book-new.png
actions/scalable/address-book-new.png

I don't want change just to make changes, but thinking...
>From automatisation point of view it's the same. Of course it would be
better to follow existing folder schemes, but...

> They have an autogen setup which apparently renders all icons in 24x24 as well (adding a 1px border to 22x22 icons)

We can start with 'manual rendering'.
There is one problem with source SVG. They can be for different target
size. How to name those files?
See metadata info [3]. We can copy those attributes.

> I believe they chose this file structure to comply with the freedesktop.org icon theme specification [4] I'm not sure how relevant this is for our purpose. It would be nice to come up with a standard file-structure so applications developers can either adept their structure to it, or write a translation script to change the structure to the one that fits their application.

We have to develop GIS-specific folders structure, but for sure this
will change (see my doubts above).
> [1] http://tango.freedesktop.org/Generic_Icon_Theme_Guidelines
> [2] http://tango.freedesktop.org/Icon_Metaphors
> [3] http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/OSGeo_Graphics#Application_icons
> [4] http://standards.freedesktop.org/icon-theme-spec/icon-theme-spec-latest.html

In the meantime I was looking for other sources, as Tango guidelines are
from year 2002. And I found this [4] as central design place with very
nice viewer of different themes [5].
More information concerning design with regard to icon size [6]
I will try to order it somehow on wiki.

Robert

[1]
http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Specifications/icon-naming-spec/to-be-named
[2] http://live.gnome.org/GnomeArt/ArtRequests
[3] http://live.gnome.org/GnomeArt/Tutorials/IconThemes
[4] http://art.gnome.org/
[5] http://people.freedesktop.org/~jimmac/icons/
[6] http://developer.gnome.org/projects/gup/hig/1.0/icons.html#icon_kinds