Hi Steven!
Steven Garrity wrote:
Is it fair to assume, then, that the Bluecurve icon style will live on?
Well, this effort is pretty much orthogonal to discussion of Fedora's default
icon set. :)
*Many* people have expressed interest in keeping Bluecurve alive. Whether or not
it lives on as the default style for Fedora, it's still a large set of GPL
artwork that is sadly quite poorly documented, so this is a plan to at least
make a set of guidelines for making more icons in the set and making it easy to
browse the entire catalog of icons and contribute to it.
The thing about Tango is, for it to really work, there needs to be
adoption.
How so?
Is there really that much advantage to every Linux desktop's icons looking
*exactly* the same? How about if we stuck to a common set of metaphors? This is
something that I brought up in my discussion with Andreas that still has not
been addressed for me:
"<andreasn> btw, if you have any suggestions on how we could make the guidelines
better, like if some of the palette colors suck please tell us they are not set
in stone in any way
<mizmo> andreasn: it's not the palette colors specifically as its just the
entire aesthetic.
* dfong nod
<mizmo> andreasn: what i think would be better is like what dfong is suggesting
- guidelines for the icon metaphors because i think (i hope) the whole point is
to make the linux desktop across distros easier to use
<mizmo>andreasn: the icon metaphor i think is really more the meat of the
usability issue than the actual aesthetic appearance" [1]
~m
[1] https://www.redhat.com/archives//2006-April/msg00036.html
_______________________________________________
@xxxxxxxxxx
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/
