RE: suggestions on toolbar icons

[Drew Adams]

I won't belabor this, but I do have a few responses. Your reply is, in
essence, "GNOOOOMMME" (shades of Allen Ginsberg w/ "Oommmm"). If GNOME's
choices are not always the best, we will nevertheless live with it.

    >  - Folder (for "file): This is _not_ good. A folder icon is used
    >    ubiquitously for, well, a folder - that is, a directory.

    You are talking Microsoft products here I guess.  This is the Gnome
    stock open icon, I see no advantage to adopt a different set of
    guidelines different from Gnome where the folder icon is not at all is
    ubiquitously used for directory. Check out any Gnome application.

    >  - Directory (Dired):
    >    Suggestion: Use a regular folder icon. Duh?

GTK_STOCK_DIRECTORY _is_ a standard folder icon. This _agrees_ with my
suggestion (not at all Microsoftesque) that a standard folder icon should be
used for Dired. If you think advocating that a folder icon be used to
represent a folder editor implies advocating adopting Microsoft conventions,
then I would suggest that you are overly zealous in your struggle. Oommmm.

Similarly, GTK_STOCK_FILE is a standard file icon. This _agrees_ with my
suggestion to keep this icon.

The question then is, what about new-file vs existing-file? I suggested
using something similar for both of these. GTK_STOCK_NEW is in fact
_identical_ to GTK_STOCK_FILE, showing that GNOME and I think alike on this
one.

Emacs, however, currently uses the _directory_ icon, GTK_STOCK_DIRECTORY for
opening an existing file - it happens that this icon is identical to
GTK_STOCK_OPEN. Using a folder to represent opening a _file_ flies in the
face of every UI I've ever seen. Are you sure that GTK_STOCK_OPEN is
intended for files, not for directories? Does using it for opening a file
make sense to you?

Finally, if you are going to use GNOME as a litmus test, then why not be
consistent and use GTK_STOCK_GOTO_TOP instead of GTK_STOCK_HOME for Info's
Top? Likewise, why not use GTK_STOCK_GO_BACK for Back (which is, presumably,
chronological) - as in Web browsers? Why use the GNOME undo/redo icon
(GTK_STOCK_REDO) for Back and Forward? I suspect that we are already
departing dangerously from the GNOME Oommmmm. It's a slippery slope...

    The Gnome stock quit could be used in info to quit, it is an arrow
    pointing to an open door.

Yes, that's better, although the icon is ambiguous (entering or exiting?)
and is not very clear (the door is hard to distinguish). I prefer the
international exit sign - the one you look for when there's a fire.

    >  - Tooltip for quit/exit:
    >    Suggestion: Use "Quit buffer", or "Delete buffer" instead of
    >    "Discard current buffer". I prefer "Quit buffer".

    But "Quit Buffer" is not clear, it could mean the same as "Quit Info"
    i.e. leaving the buffer intact, just switching to another buffer.

"Quit" is clearer (and more common) than "discard". At this level, the
distinction between leaving the buffer intact and killing it is not
important - and "discard" doesn't help with this distinction anyway.

    The point of stock items is that themes may change them and
    applications that uses stock items change appearence automatically.

I think that Emacs could do better than what is there now, but I do respect
that general argument. I wasn't aware of this.

    Gnome is the GNU desktop environment, so aligning Emacs with Gnome
    where possible makes sense. It does not make sense to me to change
    Emacs for the benefit of any other platform.

This is not about "any other platform". Aligning Emacs with GNOME is fine,
in principle. Recognize, however, that it can also mean a straightjacket at
times - Emacs will not be _better_ than whatever GNOME has already defined.

    Now, if someone would like to make a general solution, like adding
    the feature that an Emacs user can select from several different icon
    themes or make his own theme, that would be something.

Agreed.

    If you really want a change to happen it would be more likely if you
    have made the icons already (both bitmap and pixmap format), and shown
    us a picture of them in Emacs.

Sorry, I'm not an artist or an image guru. I think my descriptions got the
point across. It's a moot point anyway, if we are to adhere to the GNOME
"standard".

I said I wouldn't belabor this, but I did run on a bit. I'll not follow up -
do whatever you like. Oommmm.

 - Drew