← Back to team overview

kicad-developers team mailing list archive

Re: alternately sized icons


We have some agreement, but also some disagreement.  I do not cherish the idea of all your
hard work being trivialized.  I also put a great deal of time in designing the CMake script.

On 03/25/2012 06:30 AM, Fabrizio Tappero wrote:
> Hello,
> desiring smaller buttons is understandable especially if you have a
> small screen. But, 26 pixel buttons are (almost always) made for a
> specific button size. If you attempt to reduce it to 20 pixel or 18
> pixel or whatever, the icon will appear fuzzy.

Inkscape generates a fuzzy icon?  Why?

>  So, in general, smaller
> buttons will require a new button set, which mean to design about 450
> new images. 

I am fully unconvinced.  We invested our time in vector based bitmaps so we could scale
them.  Now you are saying we cannot scale them.  I need to be convinced.

> On the other hand, using a "snap to grid" option Inkscape
> and attempt the conversion from 26 to say 20, might give better result
> but fuzziness will always be there.

Can you post an example please.

> The other thing is, computer monitors are getting denser and denser
> (more pixels per inch), this means that icons are getting already
> smaller and smaller. The good news is that a monitor like new Apple
> iPad could almost (I guess) allow us to resize buttons without having
> to draw a new set. This is because one pixel is really tiny.
> Current kicad buttons are 26 pixel large, in 2012, this is a small
> button and in few years it will be a tiny button. in fact, we should
> actually be thinking about larger icons !!
> Please think about it.
> Cheers
> Fabrizio

I am not in favor of this alternate bitmap set, I just want it done correctly if it has to
be done.  My preference would be to have this support chase behind KiCad as an externally
maintained patch.  Because I see twice as many bitmap compiles happening.

I don't use microscopes to run KiCad.  The cost of a decent computer is less than my time

We have some agreement, but also some disagreement.


> On Sun, Mar 25, 2012 at 1:16 PM, Dick Hollenbeck <dick@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Some talk has been brewing about providing smaller icons for those running KiCad on a
>> microscope.
>> I offer some tips here on how to do that most easily.
>> Suggestion as to easiest path:
>> *) switch to DLL/DSO based bitmap lib.  All programs can dynamically link to the *same*
>> DLL/DSO bitmap library.
>> *) provide alternate bitmap DLL/DSOs, each containing a different sized set of bitmaps,
>> give user the choice at *installation* time.
>> There should be no C++ code changes required, most everything can be done from within the
>> one file: bitmaps_png/CMakeLists.txt
>> Only exception is the establishment of the PATH or LD_LIBRARY_PATH to the DLL/DSO.
>> Although bitmaps are generated using vector graphics to any practical size, we may find
>> that at smaller sizes they are too busy (even though they may be crisply generated using
>> _______________________________________________
>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
>> Post to     : kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Follow ups