[Users] Theme Contest 2014 unleashed!
peter_s_d at fastmail.com.au
Sat Nov 1 07:23:59 CET 2014
On Mon, 27 Oct 2014 11:14:08 +0100
Ricardo Mones <ricardo at mones.org> wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 02:30:53PM +1100, blind Pete wrote:
> > On Fri, 24 Oct 2014 00:45:49 +0200
> > Ricardo Mones <ricardo at mones.org> wrote:
> > > http://www.claws-mail.org/theme-contest-2014.php
> > >
> > > Happy theming!
> > Is this the appropriate place to ask themeing questions?
> If about the contest, sure :)
Unless someone says otherwise, all of my CM themeing questions are
heading this way.
> > Assuming it is;
> > Does
> > <http://www.claws-mail.org/faq/index.php/Icon_Themes_Information>
> > show the complete list of icons? Why are "notice_error" and
> > "notice_warn" blank?
> Well, they probably got missing somehow. That page is informative,
> the authoritative list of icons is on sources, of course, and these
> you refer are there:
Didn't know about that page, it is an essential link.
"Notice_error" and "notice_warn" appear to be obsolete, or planned but
never implemented enhancements. I guess that users with old releases
should be told to upgrade and developers with half baked plans should
be prodded and asked what they are planning BEFORE the submission
Mime types look like problem. There are icons for several mime types,
but many more mime types exist. Should there be a minimum set of the
form, "mime_<type>"? Perhaps an icon called, "mime_blank" which could
have text printed over it when a mime type without its own icon is
detected would be useful.
Where does the blue circle with the white "i" on it live? Is it buried
in some other source file?
Why is there no "watchthread_btn" icon? i.e. Something that looks
like "watchthead" but that matches the size and style of the toolbar.
There are others that seem to be missing as well.
> > Do all icons have a standard size, some are
> > listed, some are not. I have designed an approximately double
> > size set that suits me.
> We're trying to replace current set, so it must fit in. Doubling
> the size, while useful for some, it's not suitable for a default.
I'm actually aiming to produce a special purpose set for my own needs,
but if people like the flavour it will be fairly easy to cut the size
down again afterwards.
Because screen technology has improved dramatically, pixel size has
shrunk to the point that a healthy human eye can not resolve it. That
is much smaller what was expected not so long ago. Also computers are
no longer the domain of twenty year olds with perfect eyes. It might be
time to make the default size much larger than it was, then adjust CM's
default configuration to suit. It is mostly just configuration.
> Said that, it could be (I don't know), that some icon could fit
> _better than current_ in the UI if slightly expanded or shrinked
> 1 or 2 pixels in some direction. If somebody finds that I think
> those changes would be acceptable, just write a note in an
> accompanying README explaining icon.xpm is now XxY size because…
My current opinion is that bigger is better, but a hi-res / low-res
option might be desirable.
> But in principle new icon sizes must match current icon sizes to
> ease replacement as much as possible.
Mostly it is very easy.
> > Why do you prefer xpm to png? Is it so that
> > icons can be included as "code"?
> Exactly, as they currently are.
> > Which xpm version do you like? There
> > seem to be a few versions. Many many more questions to come.
> With the version used in source code :)
> I've updated contest page with links to this and the full icon list
> in sources, thanks!
Gimp 2.6 can open CM's xpm format. If it also saves in that format
then everything is fine. Listing a couple of editors or conversion
programs that are known to produce acceptable formats could help. Gimp
springs to mind because it is well known and available on multiple
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the Users