On 26 September 2014 12:36, Miloslav Trmač <m...@redhat.com> wrote:
> This is $n-th gradual tightening of the rules

Right, I think that's the only way to transition from having no rules
of inclusion, to a large cohesive set of high quality applications.
Dropping 95% of applications in the software center from F21 to F22
would be a very difficult thing for a lot of people to swallow.

> Wouldn’t it be more efficient to try to look more into a future, and try to 
> do _one_ icon improvement pass that could last us for at least, say, 3 or 5 
> years?

I think if I proposed 5 years ago that we'd be using 240 DPI screens
and we should start shipping icons 16 times as large on disk for this
case I don't think I would have achieved anything.

>  Just ask for something like (1024x1024 bitmap or a SVG/PDF) by F22 Beta, to 
> give us some future proofing, perhaps?

SVG isn't a silver bullet. You need a very different source SVG for a
16px icon to a 256px icon just due to the amount of detail that has to
be ommitted.

> (And I always thought that HiDPI is trying to keep the screen size of elements

You can either sacrifice quality or size; padding a 32px icon to 128px
with a giant white border would keep the icon crisp and sharp, but
scaling it up *4 would make it the right size, but with awful quality.

Richard.
-- 
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct

Reply via email to