On Wed, 2010-02-17 at 17:44 +0100, François Degrave wrote:
Vishnoo a écrit :
On Wed, 2010-02-17 at 17:18 +0100, François Degrave wrote:
On Wed, 2010-02-17 at 17:04 +0100, François Degrave wrote:
On Wednesday 17 February 2010 07:38:23 am Merk wrote:
I'm not asking why the OS X was directly copied instead of
either Windows
one. I'm asking why any existing Word icon was copied at all.
It is a mimetype and as such needs to visually represent a
certain type of
file. It goes without saying that when everyone associates a
certain
look/letter/number with something they don't search for other
visual
metaphors. People expect certain things to look certain ways ;)
--
Ken
Ok but it feels uncomfortable
Thats really awesome. :)
Then using those files types should be reduced rather than
complaining
about the icon ;)
Those filetypes are supported by OOo. No need to associate them
to icons
referencing to Ms applications not supported under Linux.
The icon is used only when someone is saving the file to be MS office
complaint.
Why cant we stop using that format , rather than nit-pick over
what one
has just chosen to continue to support?
As far as I
know, there is no reference to Adobe in the pdf files icons.
I'd suggest you check again ;)
Ok well, you are right. And that is basically... lame. Evince is the
default PDF reader, why should the icon be related to Adobe?
There is a difference between PDF and Adobe / Evince. :)
PDF is an _open_ Portable Document Format. and the logo isnt even been
used in full. ;)
Adobe is a company with several apps and Reader , Acrobat is the pdf
reader and editor respectively. Note the adobe logo isnt used. Their
logo is different.
Evince is an app too and not a format ...
Ok sorry obviously you widely misunderstood my point, maybe I was not
clear enough in my previous mail. Of course, the icon for the pdf
*filetype* is a reference to adobe; it is red/white with a big A in it
-- see attached. That is not acceptable (nor is it to put a ms word or
ms powerpoint logo in a *filetype* icon). The only thing the user has
to know is that it is a pdf file, period. In MacOsX, the icon is like
that (ok that's a .ps here, but it's the same for .pdf):
http://www.entropy.ch/software/macosx/docs/openoffice-mac/temp-ps-file.png
Do you see a reference to Adobe Reader? No of course, because it is not
the default reader. Putting a reference to Adobe makes the user think it
will open with Adobe when double-clicking on the file.
The problem is the same for the psd file icon (attached): why putting a
Photoshop logo? The user only has to know it is an image, with the psd
extension. The photoshop logo is a nonsense here.
(You can try asking the evince developers if they think it is a good
idea to have icons for *pdf filetype* referencing to Adobe by default in
Ubuntu, I'm pretty sure what the answer will be. Same with OpenOffice
developers and doc, xls and ppt files icons.)
Cheers,
François
inline: gnome-mime-application-pdf.svginline: gnome-mime-image-x-psd.svg--
ubuntu-art mailing list
ubuntu-art@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-art
