On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 11:07 AM, Petr Pisar <ppisar@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 2012-01-11, Richard Shaw <hobbes1069@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 10:05 AM, Petr Pisar <ppisar@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> On 2012-01-11, Richard Shaw <hobbes1069@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> 1. If installing icons into in to /usr/share/pixmaps is indeed >>>> deprecated. Then we need to update the packaging guidelines for the >>>> Desktop Files section[2]. In the "Icon tag in Desktop Files" section >>>> it explicitly shows a full path to an icon file in /usr/share/pixmaps. >>>> While not intended as a guideline, it should be revised to showing a >>>> full path to an icon in /usr/share/icons/hicolor (probably in the >>>> 48x48 directory since it's the minimum requirement[3].) >>>> >>> This would forbid desktop environment to pick up more appropriate format >>> (e.g. SVG) and made other icon variants useless just vasting a space. >> >> I'm not sure I understand what your saying. A 48x48 icon is already a >> minimum requirement, regardless of my proposal. But I don't see how >> anything I proposed makes any other icon sizes useless. >> > If you put absolute path to icon file into desktop file, then desktop > environment can use only this one exact icon file (you suggest 48×48 > bitmap) for the application. Nowhere did I suggest that the "Short name without extension" example should be removed, only that the full pathname example should be updated to use /usr/share/icon/hicolor over /usr/share/pixmaps. Thanks, Richard -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
