Re: Yet another emacs icons

[Ken Manheimer]

i like andrew zhilin's set of notebook icons very much, and think
there are compelling reasons to go with them.

first of all, i think most of the other candidates are misguided,
because text in an icon is almost always clutter.  i am fairly certain
that icons serve the purpose of elemental glyphs in user interfaces,
and text in a glyph is unweildy clutter.  even a single letter is the
wrong thing - a glyph in a glyph.  (those companies that do use a
letter for their brand icon usually abstract it.  macdonalds presents
it's M brand icon as "golden arches", and that's they way i, for one,
remember it - not the "golden M".)

the notebook-ish set of images are simple and memorable - glyph-like. 
people will recognize them distinct from other icons, even when
reduced to the squiggle.

they are explicable - people can make the connection between the gnu
horns and the emacs icon squiggle, and see that the larger (than
16x16) versions convey a notebook.  i think both are extremely useful
associations for an emacs icon, and add value to the proposition.

at the same time, an icon need not have an obvious literal meaning to
be recognizable.  look at the lucent zen circle, the nike swoosh, the
bp mandala, etc. all are distinctive in elemental ways (while having
some conceptual mnemonic for the companies they denote).

they (andrew's notebook icons) are graceful, at all scales.  it's a
*nice* squiggle, that will be a pleasure to add to your launch bar.

these points add up to an appealing, distinctive, and memorable symbol
for denoting emacs, and i think add up to a really winning icon.

ken manheimer
address@hidden