Hi everyone,
I don't know if we can say this. Only when our Wine-supplied icons are appearing near application-supplied icons do we gain some consistency by mimicing Windows style, but that consistency is confined to that particular app. Most icons the user sees are instead going to be compared with the rest of the desktop and its applications, and adopting a Tango style rather than a Windows style is the only way to get that overall consistency.
If we're not careful, Wine apps may continue to stick out rather than be just another part of the desktop.
If wine should integrate well with the surrounding Linux desktop, why don't you use the desktop icon set where possible? By using the Tango icons, wine applications will still stick out on almost all non-Gnome system (most notably KDE) as well as those Gnome desktops where the icon set was changed - that's not what I would call integration. I agree that the Tango icons are prettier than the one currently used, and as a result an improvement, but unfortunately they won't fix the "sticking out".
Kind regards, Ralf Jung
Ralf Jung wrote:
Hi everyone,
I don't know if we can say this. Only when our Wine-supplied icons are appearing near application-supplied icons do we gain some consistency by mimicing Windows style, but that consistency is confined to that particular app. Most icons the user sees are instead going to be compared with the rest of the desktop and its applications, and adopting a Tango style rather than a Windows style is the only way to get that overall consistency.
If we're not careful, Wine apps may continue to stick out rather than be just another part of the desktop.
If wine should integrate well with the surrounding Linux desktop, why don't you use the desktop icon set where possible? By using the Tango icons, wine applications will still stick out on almost all non-Gnome system (most notably KDE) as well as those Gnome desktops where the icon set was changed - that's not what I would call integration. I agree that the Tango icons are prettier than the one currently used, and as a result an improvement, but unfortunately they won't fix the "sticking out".
Kind regards, Ralf Jung
It's true, not everyone is using Tango, but it's the closest thing we have to a standard. It certainly wouldn't hurt to make Wine compatible with multiple icon sets and then let packagers choose which one to use, so I could provide a Gnome-wine and a KDE-wine and so on.
Starting with Tango seems like the best first bet though.
Thanks, Scott Ritchie
Hi,
It's true, not everyone is using Tango, but it's the closest thing we have to a standard. It certainly wouldn't hurt to make Wine compatible with multiple icon sets and then let packagers choose which one to use, so I could provide a Gnome-wine and a KDE-wine and so on.
Starting with Tango seems like the best first bet though.
I hope this does not sound offending, but why is Tango more of a standard than, e.g., Oxygen? I'm really just curious, please don't think I want to start a flame-war here. And, of course, I'd like to see wine integrated regardless of the desktop environment in use :D
Several icon packets sound great. I wonder if it is possible for wine to automatically use the icon set of the environment? Of course some icons don't exist in the Linux world, but for example message boxes or icons for files and folders are available this way. Then one would not need to make a KDE- and a Gnome-wine.
Kind regards, Ralf Jung
As of XP themes can specify their own icons. For some dlls I believe shell32 they need to provide their own shellapi.dll or whatever it is called. I think that would be the way to proceed. I would suggest to make Tango the base theme as it integrates well with KDE/Gnome and also OSX. Using themes (some of the infrastructure for it is missing though) you would be able to override the Tango icons.
Roderick
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 3:34 PM, Ralf Jung ralfjung-e@gmx.de wrote:
Hi,
It's true, not everyone is using Tango, but it's the closest thing we have to a standard. It certainly wouldn't hurt to make Wine compatible with multiple icon sets and then let packagers choose which one to use, so I could provide a Gnome-wine and a KDE-wine and so on.
Starting with Tango seems like the best first bet though.
I hope this does not sound offending, but why is Tango more of a standard than, e.g., Oxygen? I'm really just curious, please don't think I want to start a flame-war here. And, of course, I'd like to see wine integrated regardless of the desktop environment in use :D
Several icon packets sound great. I wonder if it is possible for wine to automatically use the icon set of the environment? Of course some icons don't exist in the Linux world, but for example message boxes or icons for files and folders are available this way. Then one would not need to make a KDE- and a Gnome-wine.
Kind regards, Ralf Jung -- Jetzt kostenlos herunterladen: Internet Explorer 8 und Mozilla Firefox 3 - sicherer, schneller und einfacher! http://portal.gmx.net/de/go/atbrowser
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 9:02 AM, Roderick Colenbrander < thunderbird2k@gmail.com> wrote:
As of XP themes can specify their own icons. For some dlls I believe shell32 they need to provide their own shellapi.dll or whatever it is called. I think that would be the way to proceed. I would suggest to make Tango the base theme as it integrates well with KDE/Gnome and also OSX. Using themes (some of the infrastructure for it is missing though) you would be able to override the Tango icons.
Roderick
Normally under Windows, it is possible to totally replace the icons for almost everything through the File types and associations dialog. You can even change the icon of a file folder. I don't think most people are aware that Windows can have all of its icons dynamically remapped by design.
On Mon, 21 Sep 2009, King InuYasha wrote: [...]
Normally under Windows, it is possible to totally replace the icons for almost everything through the File types and associations dialog. You can even change the icon of a file folder. I don't think most people are aware that Windows can have all of its icons dynamically remapped by design.
If Wine can do the remapping through the registry then that's workable. If the registry just references icons in resource dlls, then that means Wine would need to generate resource dlls at run time and that's not so good.
By default, it references icons in resource DLLs, but it can be configured for regular ICO files.
On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 8:25 AM, Francois Gouget fgouget@free.fr wrote:
On Mon, 21 Sep 2009, King InuYasha wrote: [...]
Normally under Windows, it is possible to totally replace the icons for almost everything through the File types and associations dialog. You can even change the icon of a file folder. I don't think most people are
aware
that Windows can have all of its icons dynamically remapped by design.
If Wine can do the remapping through the registry then that's workable. If the registry just references icons in resource dlls, then that means Wine would need to generate resource dlls at run time and that's not so good.
-- Francois Gouget fgouget@free.fr http://fgouget.free.fr/ RFC 2549: ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc2549.txt IP over Avian Carriers with Quality of Service
On Mon, 2009-09-21 at 16:02 +0200, Roderick Colenbrander wrote:
As of XP themes can specify their own icons. For some dlls I believe shell32 they need to provide their own shellapi.dll or whatever it is called. I think that would be the way to proceed. I would suggest to make Tango the base theme as it integrates well with KDE/Gnome and also OSX. Using themes (some of the infrastructure for it is missing though) you would be able to override the Tango icons.
Are you sure that includes the user32 icons? I know it works for shell objects, but I didn't think it could apply to anything that didn't have a PIDL!
I think I read somewhere that shellstyle.dll (that's the name) can contain icons (and I guess effects as well) but I'm not 100% sure. I would guess that we need to download some themes which have a shellstyle and see what's in it.
Roderick
On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 12:27 AM, Joel Holdsworth joel@airwebreathe.org.uk wrote:
On Mon, 2009-09-21 at 16:02 +0200, Roderick Colenbrander wrote:
As of XP themes can specify their own icons. For some dlls I believe shell32 they need to provide their own shellapi.dll or whatever it is called. I think that would be the way to proceed. I would suggest to make Tango the base theme as it integrates well with KDE/Gnome and also OSX. Using themes (some of the infrastructure for it is missing though) you would be able to override the Tango icons.
Are you sure that includes the user32 icons? I know it works for shell objects, but I didn't think it could apply to anything that didn't have a PIDL!
As shown on the screenshots here from windowblinds it is able to override shell icons. I have no idea how it is doing that though. http://frogboy.joeuser.com/article/150608
Roderick
On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 12:35 AM, Roderick Colenbrander thunderbird2k@gmail.com wrote:
I think I read somewhere that shellstyle.dll (that's the name) can contain icons (and I guess effects as well) but I'm not 100% sure. I would guess that we need to download some themes which have a shellstyle and see what's in it.
Roderick
On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 12:27 AM, Joel Holdsworth joel@airwebreathe.org.uk wrote:
On Mon, 2009-09-21 at 16:02 +0200, Roderick Colenbrander wrote:
As of XP themes can specify their own icons. For some dlls I believe shell32 they need to provide their own shellapi.dll or whatever it is called. I think that would be the way to proceed. I would suggest to make Tango the base theme as it integrates well with KDE/Gnome and also OSX. Using themes (some of the infrastructure for it is missing though) you would be able to override the Tango icons.
Are you sure that includes the user32 icons? I know it works for shell objects, but I didn't think it could apply to anything that didn't have a PIDL!
As far as I know, shellstyles do not contain icons, but rather resource data for theming, such as how the start menu will be displayed. For example, a XP theme I used quite a few years ago removed the Start text from the start menu and replaced the green button with the image of Sonic. Icons have always been separate from the visual/shell styles, afaik.
To map icons the way you want, you would need to use the Registry.
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 5:35 PM, Roderick Colenbrander < thunderbird2k@gmail.com> wrote:
I think I read somewhere that shellstyle.dll (that's the name) can contain icons (and I guess effects as well) but I'm not 100% sure. I would guess that we need to download some themes which have a shellstyle and see what's in it.
Roderick
On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 12:27 AM, Joel Holdsworth joel@airwebreathe.org.uk wrote:
On Mon, 2009-09-21 at 16:02 +0200, Roderick Colenbrander wrote:
As of XP themes can specify their own icons. For some dlls I believe shell32 they need to provide their own shellapi.dll or whatever it is called. I think that would be the way to proceed. I would suggest to make Tango the base theme as it integrates well with KDE/Gnome and also OSX. Using themes (some of the infrastructure for it is missing though) you would be able to override the Tango icons.
Are you sure that includes the user32 icons? I know it works for shell objects, but I didn't think it could apply to anything that didn't have a PIDL!
Ralf Jung wrote:
Hi,
It's true, not everyone is using Tango, but it's the closest thing we have to a standard. It certainly wouldn't hurt to make Wine compatible with multiple icon sets and then let packagers choose which one to use, so I could provide a Gnome-wine and a KDE-wine and so on.
Starting with Tango seems like the best first bet though.
I hope this does not sound offending, but why is Tango more of a standard than, e.g., Oxygen? I'm really just curious, please don't think I want to start a flame-war here. And, of course, I'd like to see wine integrated regardless of the desktop environment in use :D
Several icon packets sound great. I wonder if it is possible for wine to automatically use the icon set of the environment? Of course some icons don't exist in the Linux world, but for example message boxes or icons for files and folders are available this way. Then one would not need to make a KDE- and a Gnome-wine.
Tango has some nice style guidelines for making individual icons on their website, for one, and not just a color palette.
Thanks, Scott Ritchie
2009/9/21 Ralf Jung ralfjung-e@gmx.de:
I hope this does not sound offending, but why is Tango more of a standard than, e.g., Oxygen? I'm really just curious, please don't think I want to start a flame-war here. And, of course, I'd like to see wine integrated regardless of the desktop environment in use :D
For me, Oxygen is stupidly big compared to Tango :D
On Mon, 21 Sep 2009, Ralf Jung wrote: [...]
If wine should integrate well with the surrounding Linux desktop, why don't you use the desktop icon set where possible?
Because on Windows the icons are stored as resources in the dlls. So Windows applications and dlls use the same generic API for loading their private resources, as well as the Windows resources.
So to implement what you want, the LoadIcon() function in user32.dll would need to know about the icons stored in shell32.dll, crypt32.dll, etc, and what KDE, Gnome or XFce icon to replace them with. That would break the dll separation principle.
Maybe theming provides a way to replace these icons. If so, then that would be the way to go. Otherwise we may invent our own way of doing so, like storing special 'remapping' resources that would tell LoadIcon() to replace a given icon with one from outside the dll. That would still require quite a bit of work: we cannot return a PNG icon to the application, it would need to be converted to ico format, and (probably) with the various sizes and depths collated together, etc. We'd also have to hack the data returned by FindResource() & co to take these remappings into account. That could get ugly pretty quick.
-
Ben Klein -
Francois Gouget -
Joel Holdsworth -
King InuYasha -
Ralf Jung -
Roderick Colenbrander -
Scott Ritchie