On Tue, 16 Aug 2011 13:17:38 +0200 Christoph Wickert wrote: > No you are not, I already complained about this in > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=678696 but there is no way > to change it because the icon names are hardcoded to *-symbolic. IHMO > this is fundamentally wrong as it only works with a single icon theme > (gnome-icon-theme-symbolic) and does not conform to the xdg icon > naming spec. > > IHMO the right approach is > 1. Have have gnome-icon-theme-symbolic use the normal names > according to xdg icon naming standards > 2. Have gnome-icon-theme-symbolic include gnome-icon-theme > (done), so it prefers symbolic icons if available and falls back to > the colored icons if symbolic icons are not available. I think the same and have another reason for this: symbolic icons don't work the way they are supposed to with GTK+2, which means that with some [not uncommon] panel configurations it makes the icon practically invisible (e.g. if you use ibus input method and have the indicator displayed even if ibus is turned off, set panel colour to #BFBFBF and guess where the icon disappeared to...). The question is, can we do anything with the situation? Patch icon themes to symlink symbolic icon filenames to "proper" icons included in the particular themes? Or mass file bugs about offending apps + gnome-icon-theme-symbolic? Cheers, Martin
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-- desktop mailing list desktop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
