On Sun, Jan 07, 2007 at 12:12:22AM -0500, Eric Dorland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > * Cesar Martinez Izquierdo ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > Package: iceweasel > > Version: 2.0.0.1+dfsg-1 > > Severity: wishlist > > > > (Note: I've reported a similar bug against Icedove: #404880). > > The new iceweasel icon is quite nice, but it is very > > confusing at small sizes. > > > > My gnome-panel size is set on 24 pixels, and at this size it's > > impossible to distinguish the shapes of the icon. The > > only thing I can see is a white spot on a green 'thing', so it's > > quite hard to guess that this icon represents a web browser. > > > > Moreover, the new icedove icon looks quite similar at this size, > > so it's very difficult to distinguish them. This is a problem > > for shortcuts and also for the taskbar. Just try to open 5 iceweasel > > windows and icedove, look at the taskbar and try to distinguish > > them in a fast glance. > > > > Please, provide an icon with clearer shapes, and which colour > > is different from Icedove one. > > > > Other applications' icons look OK at this size (examples: nautilus, > > gnome-terminal, amsn, kmail, rythmbox, gedit, etc). I can provide > > some snapshots. > > I kind of have to agree with Cesar here. They look a little indistinct > at small sizes, and while the unified color scheme seemed cool, I > guess it does have a downside. Perhaps unicko would be willing to give > each icon a more unique color scheme (blue for iceweasel, leave the > green for icedove and red for iceape?) and perhaps add a bit more > contrast to the borders because it blends a bit too much into a light > background. Hope that doesn't sound too ungrateful.
I think specially crafted versions with "thicker" borders and with more contrast should be enough for small sizes. Mike -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
