kicad-developers team mailing list archive

[Fabrizio Tappero <fabrizio.tappero@xxxxxxxxx>]

Dear Jean-Pierre,
my apologies for the late answer, I was busy at work.

Thank you for taking the time to write this lengthy e-mail.

I just would like to clarify that I never expressed any intention of
using non-svg format. I just mentioned that simply converting svg to
any raster format does not always lead to acceptable results. SVG
icons need to be made for a specific bmp format (26px in out case).

As you propose, I will work on gradually improve the current icons,
I'll do my best to maintain the current look and maximize the beauty
of all icons ;-)

Best regards
Fabrizio





On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 9:46 AM, jp charras <jp.charras@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Le 25/10/2013 14:08, Fabrizio Tappero a écrit :
>> Dear Jean-Pierre,
>> I agree, updating documentation is such a pain when icons change and I
>> actually remember spending a long time on it. That is why I actually
>> let 2 years pass. I think 26px icons changed and improved a lot how
>> KiCad looks.
>>
>> The thing is that from a graphical point of view the current KiCad
>> icons are a little bit a mishmash of colors and styles, I think it
>> would be good to make them belong to the same theme. More or less the
>> same thing was done with Tango icons for Linux.
>>
>> Original Icons are vector-based SVG icons but unfortunately that does
>> not mean that they can be resized on any resolution. when you do a svg
>> to 26px png conversion and the svg icon has a vertical line that is
>> larger than 1/26 the width of the svg icon the result is a fuzzy
>> vertical line. This is a very well known problem in the graphic design
>> world and re-touching manually the PNG is always a must.
>
> I know that.
> However I am still thinking using vector-based SVG icons is better than
> using fixed bitmap icons.
>
> Most of time we have to choose between disadvantages, not advantages.
>
> And for me, to be able to easily change the icon size is a bigger
> advantage than having good vertical lines.
> (In fact, SVG icons are not so bad)
> And sometimes you have to create a set of 16,32,64 ... bitmaps of the
> same icon.
> I also am thinking modifying SVG icons with inkscape is (by far) more
> easier than modifying bitmaps icons
>
> I am also pretty sure many icons used in Linux world are most of time
> created in svg format (see
> http://openiconlibrary.sourceforge.net/downloads.html, full package)
> Using only bitmap icons come from Windows world, not from Unix world
>
>>
>> In the work for KiCad I did adjust each of the 460 icons but I have
>> not really done a great job because of the limited time (=large number
>> of icons). So some icons need to be fixed. However, what I cannot
>> really do is to maintain 460 icons, that is why I proposed to drop the
>> drop down menu ones.
>
> I fully understand 460 icons to maintain is a lot of work.
> Thanks you for the great work you did.
>
> But like you said only some icons need to be fixed, not 460!.
> Most of them are quite good, therefore no need to recreate all icons:
> Recreating *all* icons, when most of them are good is just wasting you time.
>
> Of course, enhancing some icons (the bad ones) is good.
>
>>
>> So here we have two problems: 1) some icons are fuzzy, 2) many icons
>> are a mishmash of styles. Fixing both is hard but possible and would
>> give to KiCad was it is often perceived as a professional looking
>> software tool (like gEDA for instance)
>
> I agree: I would like to see these fuzzy icons, and mismatch style fixed.
>
> But I really thinking most of icons are quite good.
>
> Still believe me:
> A professional looking software tool needs to have some icons in dialogs
> which explains the purpose or the effect of some options
> (in dialog zone for instance to show thermal reliefs, and many other
> dialogs).
> Have a look to Pcb Calculator and its Transline dialog:
> without icons, it is not usable.
>
> A professional looking software tool needs this kind of icons:
> This is more important than recreate all icons in toolbars.
>
>>
>> To ease this transition I am offering to update some of the English
>> documentation too. I would ask the people who appear as maintainers of
>> the various non English docs to take care of their portion.
> Thanks.
>
> For icons which are enhanced, if the new look is not very different from
> the old one, doc does not always require to be updated.
> Update is needed when icons are fully different.
>
>>
>> Regarding the icons in the drop-down menus, I of course see the
>> advantage of having additional info next to the menu item. I am a
>> great fan of it but if you like it to be done, it is necessary to do
>> it as it is normally done, for instance, in inkscape, see attachment.
>> icons in the drop down menues are smaller.
>
> I am fan of icons in menus. In many case they help (see mirror/rotate
> commands for instance).
>
> But I do not understand the meaning of "it is necessary to do
>  it as it is normally done".
> Smaller icon sizes in menus is only a convenient way to have smaller
> menus (16x16 icon is roughly the size of a letter and its margins).
> Until now I never read anything about the best icon size in menus, there
> is also not a better size for fonts: the better size is the size you
> like and it depends on you screen size, and how old you are (believe me,
> this is not a joke).
>
>>
>> Some of the icons that Konstantin has made are much better than what we have.
>
> Yes, they could be used to replace some icons.
>>
>> In my opinion we could start by slowly update 5 or 10 icons each time
>> beginning from the most critical ones (e.g. Pcbnew left side)
>>
>> Cheers
>> Fabrizio
>
> I do not know if you want to recreate icons using SVG format (Inkscape)
> or a bitmap format to avoid fuzzy icons.
>
> I am thinking using a bitmap format is a very bad idea:
> I experimented the 2 methods, and I can say SVG format + Inkscape is by
> far the best way to create and maintain icons.
> And yes, sometimes SVG icons converted in bitmaps are slightly fuzzy,
> but this is the price we should pay to have easy to maintain and easy to
> use icons.
>
> Thanks for you involvement.
>
> --
> Jean-Pierre CHARRAS