On Fri, Dec 15, 2006 at 12:13:01PM +0100, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> Angus Leeming wrote:
> >What's the plan with the icons? I see that there's a desire to standardize
> >their sizes, but what's the preferred size? 22x22 or 20x20? Please don't
> >pipe in with 16x16 or somesuch. The files in lib/images seem to fall into
> >three flavours: 20x20, 22x22 and 24x24. Those in lib/images/math are much
> >more heterogeneous. Is there any desire to standardize them too?
> >
> >A quick browse of the internet shows that SVG is *not* the way to go for
> >these small icons and that a single bitmap size really *is* the best
> >solution. However, does anyone have a recommended strategy to follow to
> >get there? A quick play with ImageMagick's convert tool:
> >
> >        convert -resize '22x22' layout_Itemize.xpm angus.xpm
> 
> If you are going to touch all icons I suggest that we switch to png now.

And declare icons a "Gui thing".

Andre'

Reply via email to