Conformance to the Icon Theme Specification

[Gerold J. Wucherpfennig]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Here is the full specification (most of you will know this already):
http://www.freedesktop.org/standards/icon-theme-spec/icon-theme-spec.html

I will quote some parts of it...


>...there must be a file called index.theme that describes the theme.

The KDE icon themes still have index.desktop files. IHMO they should be
renamed to index.theme, is this ok?

>[Icon Theme]

The first line "[KDE Icon Theme]" in the index.desktop files
should be renamed to "[Icon Theme]" does everybody agree?

>By default, apps should look in $HOME/.icons, /usr/share/icons and
>/usr/share/pixmaps (in that order).

So the Icon KControl module should look in $HOME/.icons, /usr/share/icons and 
/usr/share/pixmaps, too...
Probably there should even be a ./configure option "--freedesktop-standards" 
so that all icon themes will be put into these folders and KDE applications 
will use them ("/usr/share/icons" and "$HOME/.icons" instead of 
"$KDEDIR/share/icons" and "$HOME/.kde/share/icons").
And what about the pixmap directory? No KDE application seems to use it.

BTW:
The RH Bluecurve icon theme has 96x96 pixel icons.
This seems to be quite reasonable to me:
16  x1.5 = 22
16 x2   = 32
32 x1.5 = 48
32 x2   = 64
64 x1.5 = 96 <-- 96 pixel icons
The crystalsvg icon theme has no 96x96 icons, but instead very large
128x128 ones, why?

(Please CC me)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE+Fxi+53zyw+ONqrERAhBhAJsF45j0IKJeMpvtBnekfY1AQG3bvgCfRlVp
AY/A4rlRAYfmXk6PkVWzsEU=
=TkjX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----