Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2014 Archives by date, by thread · List index

Hi Mirek,

On 11/16/2014 12:18 AM, Mirek M. wrote:
Hi Jay,

2014-11-15 20:52 GMT+01:00 Jay Philips <

    Hi Mirek and Alex,

    On 11/15/2014 07:31 PM, Alexander Wilms wrote:
    > Hi Mirek,
    > I and Jay agreed that the icons look much clearer without the candy-ish
    > fill, especially the "T" and the omega. Currently, the icons bold,
    > italic and underlined in master use the Gnome 2.20 style, with a rather
    > flat gradient and highlights. Here's a SVG comparing the different
    > versions:
    > I didn't attend the last two hangouts, so we didn't make a decision
    > regarding the text icon style, but I could attend next week.

    We discussed the icon style in last week's hangout and we decided to go
    with the style i've been using (i mentioned this in the redmine thread).

OK, that's fine, and I kind of like its flatness.
As I mentioned in my reply to Alex, though, there need to be guidelines
for this new style, and it shouldn't be called "tango" anymore.

Yes the gnome 2.20 style is alot better than the glossy gnome 3.0+ style
at the 24x24 icon size. We are only using the older style for the text
based icons like bold, italics, underline, etc. It is still tango as its
using the gnome 2.20 style.

    > Regarding the icon size, is it really that bad if a few icons make use
    > of the 1 px margin? E.g. the text lines in the bullets and numbering
    > icons look too slim if one leaves the margin untouched.

    I normally only go over the margin width-wise when there is a major need
    for it, like in the case of the bullets and numbering icons. The only
    thing that i may let go over the margin height-wise is the shadow.

22x22 is the size recommended by the Tango guidelines. It's the default
size for KDE and 22x22 with a 1px border is the default for Gnome. I
don't think a size increase was necessary in the numbering icons and, in
general, if we're able to make a 16x16 icon, a 22x22 version shouldn't
be a problem, and it'd be good for icon consistency to stick to a size

That said, I'm fine with going for 24x24 with this new style, but if
we're going to do that, this size either needs to be the new norm or
there need to be guidelines on when this size is acceptable. (I'd go
with the former.)

Yes it always best to stick with the guidelines but we shouldnt be
willing to bend the rules when there are suitable cases to do so. I'm
not an icon designer, so all i'm doing is patching up icons which are
already present. I'll let the designers decide what best works for you
guys, as i dont have the skill to comment on this.

Since you're the one behind the new style, could you please give a name
to this style and change and expand Guidelines regarding
lighting and shadows in particular would be very useful. (The lack of
lighting in the new style clashes a bit with the old shadows, IMHO.)

I didnt create the style, i took the gnome 3.12
format-indent-justify-text.svg file, made the stroke a solid color,
changed the gradient to be similar to the 2.20 gradient and reduced the
shadow transparency by half.

Looking at GitHub, you don't seem to be a member -- could you send me
your GitHub username (make an account if you don't have one) and, after
you get access, add yourself to the AUTHORS file?

My github username is philipzae. I'd be honored to be included in the
file, though i wouldnt truly be able to contribute to the svgs. :D

To unsubscribe e-mail to:
Posting guidelines + more:
List archive:
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted


Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images on this website are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2). "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy.