Enrico Forestieri wrote: > It does not hold because only the sizes would be standard, not the icons > themselves, which are wildly different between OSes and even between > desktop environments in the same OS.
Sure. Where did I speak of default icons (or stock icons, for that matter)? I always referred to default icon sizes. So the argument holds. > As regards the fact that "we take the > majority of our icons from existing icons sets", I think that you are > able to show that this assertion is true. Sure. At least as far as the fortcoming switch to the Oxygen icons is concerned. > You cannot choose to use the standard OS icons, so the icons you are going > to propose will fit to a specific OS and desktop environment and not > others. So, LyX's UI is going to not differ from the rest of the OS only > for a specific OS and desktop environment. Sure, I would also like to have stock icons support. But since we do not have this (yet), and since it is probably much work, we should at least use the sizes that are common at least on the two major Linux desktops and on Win (and probably also on Mac, I did not check that). You're argument basically reads: if we differ anyway, anything goes. And mine: let's at least try to match those standards that are easy to match. BTW you know that you can freely chose different icon sets at least on KDE and GNOME. But all these sets, no matter how different the design, stick to the default sizes, AFAICS. Jürgen
