Re: menus & icons styles

[Mikhael G. <mi...@co...>]

On 01 Dec 2000 16:43:24 +0100, Olivier Chapuis wrote:
> 
> I would like to do at least the following now:
> 
> Split the (mini)icons styles in more files:
> 
> + One under settings/iconstyle/ as the current but without the
> GNOME and KDE applications (of course this file need some works
> but we may wait for wm-icons 0.3)

This will not be ready without your help. I will start a new thread about
wm-icons when I will have more time start to work on it.

> + New options under KDE for icons styles:
> 	- disabled (default?)
> 	- wm/ft-icons (maybe default?)

Depends on the number of the KDE icon style patterns in wm-icons.
We may start with the second as a default and see if it takes time.

> 	- KDE2 mini-icons (tr-images)
> 	- KDE1 mini-icons (native kde1 icons)
> 
> Note that only mini-icons styles is needed for the last two options
> because KDE apps give icons.

Are these normal icons defined by apps globally resize-able?

The problem with KDE (or GNOME) application definitions (the icon section)
is that it is almost guaranteed that some .desktop file lists an icon,
which does not actually exist on the user's disk, and a user gets a lot of
warnings and no icons in some places.

> + "As above" for GNOME.

Except that GNOME applications do not set normal icons (when iconified).

> Of course this imply some changes (simplifications) in the menu 
> KDE/GNOME options but it seems to me that such menu must be 
> generated each time and that its not reasonable to generate 
> the styles fvwm-menu-desktop ...

As I understand you, these icon options will be global for all GNOME or
KDE menus, and there will be variants for each menu (system, user..) "on"
and "off". This is ok.

But I don't understand the second part of your paragraph.

> I do not think that this logic can be bad for the future.

I don't know. I would solve this together with wm-icons, but if you see a
reason to do it now, do it.

Regards,
Mikhael.