Re: Icon love

[Owen Taylor <otaylor redhat com>]

Hi Tigert,

I'm happy to turn over responsibility for the stock icons in GTK+ to you
and jimmac. (In fact, Jimmac has already been committing to 
gtk+/icons/stock-icons).

The one restriction here is that new stock icons are new API, so they
can only go in when we are adding API to GTK+. We can probably create
a CVS module for stock icons not in GTK+ or gnome-libs, but applications
need to include such icons themselves until the next API revision.

File type icons are a separate issue as far as integration goes, and
I'll leave how to do that up to the nautilus people. 

I've just created a new component in bugzilla for GTK+ "stock icons" - there
are two bugs in there now:

 http://bugzilla.gnome.org/buglist.cgi?product=gtk%2b&component=stock-icons

[ #68896 has an long-term artwork component, and a short-term component
  which is more of a tweak to the icon registration thing ]

We can make the default owner for this component an alias that points to
you and jimmac, if that makes sense.

> So here we have a new set of stock icons for GNOME2, fully antialiased
> and with separate 16x16 versions for menus (good bye smoothed,
> unreadable menu icons..)

While having prescaled versions of icons is nice, as a long term thing
I'd like to have all the GTK+ stock icons also available at a large
size (at least 48x48, maybe 96x96.) 

One reason for this is that the GTK+ API allows for a programmer to
ask for a stock icon at any of the predifined sizes, and if that's
bigger than the available sizes, things will look (obviously) like
crap. We can mark icons as unscaleable, but then things get confusing,
because if the programmer asks for the icon in the wrong size, they
get the broken image icon.

Also, it's planned that people will be able to change the default icons
sizes ... if you have 24 point fonts, 16 pixel menu icons are goingt
to look a bit silly. So, it would be nice if we have flexibility.

This is obviously a lot of work, so I'll just suggest it as a project
for the future.

Regards,
                                        Owen