On 07/28/2010 12:36 AM, Damjan Jovanovic wrote: >> > > freedesktop.org has a spec for a shared thumbnail cache > (http://triq.net/~jens/thumbnail-spec/index.html), but no accepted > spec for a file browser to request that a file be thumbnailed: there's > a draft DBUS thumbnailing spec that's been heavily discussed last year > but it still isn't ready or adopted by any/most desktops > (http://live.gnome.org/ThumbnailerSpec). > > I was thinking that what we could do, is when we generate a .lnk file > on the desktop, we also write a thumbnail for it to the shared > thumbnail cache - that way the desktop environment doesn't need to ask > us to generate a thumbnail since it already exists. But then the cache > could be cleared out periodically meaning we'd eventually lose the > thumbnail. Winemenubuilder could work around this by regenerating all > thumbnails that are missing on every startup. But even if this is > acceptable solution, it's still hard to implement, because the > thumbnail cache spec requires specific thumbnail sizes (128x128 or > 256x256) and a special pixel format (256 colour indexed-mode PNG IIRC) > which means we'd need to resize and colour convert the icon(s), and it > needs special PNG comments on the thumbnails which windowscodecs > doesn't support even on Windows AFAIK. So is this idea viable? >
That spec will need to be updated. Gnome recently started supporting thumbnails that are smaller than the overly large 128x128 (actually I think it was 96x96 originally). gnome-exe-thumbnailer now relies on this behavior to render properly, in the past when it was forced to large sizes it looked incredibly ugly. Thanks, Scott Ritchie
