reduce icons in icon chooser dialog

[Jannis Pohlmann]

On Mon, 28 Mar 2011 17:32:42 +0200
Nick Schermer <nickschermer at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 8:10 AM, Jannis Pohlmann <jannis at xfce.org>
> wrote:
> > On Sun, 27 Mar 2011 23:27:57 +0200
> > Nick Schermer <nickschermer at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Sun, Mar 27, 2011 at 11:11 PM, Jannis Pohlmann <jannis at xfce.org>
> >> wrote:
> >> > On Sun, 27 Mar 2011 16:38:14 +0200
> >> > Nick Schermer <nickschermer at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Bump
> >> >>
> >> >> On Sun, Feb 27, 2011 at 8:27 PM, Nick Schermer
> >> >> <nickschermer at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> > Folks,
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I've just pushed a branch to exo that excludes the 'symlink'
> >> >> > icons in a theme from the icon view. On the common themes
> >> >> > (Gnome,Tango) this reduces the number of icons with ~50% (ie.
> >> >> > 50% of the icons are symlinks to real files) and you only see
> >> >> > each image once. The symlink names are stored internally, so
> >> >> > when you open the chooser for a desktop files with
> >> >> > "xfce4-settings" as icon name, "preferences-desktop" is
> >> >> > selected.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Downside of this is that "preferences-desktop" is returned
> >> >> > when you click ok and xfce4-settings is lost (I could fix that
> >> >> > behaviour, but you get the point; spec names are set in those
> >> >> > cases).
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Upside, less icons to scroll, and probably (no proof here)
> >> >> > much faster; because even though the code pokes the files to
> >> >> > check if they are symlinks, nothing is worse for performance
> >> >> > then rendering images.
> >> >
> >> > Am I wrong here or does this also mean that some icon names will
> >> > simply disappear? That might make some people wonder why icons
> >> > they have been using before are missing out of a sudden.
> >>
> >> Indeed they do disappear. I could show in a tooltip which other
> >> icon-names the icon represents, but I don't think people care about
> >> names _that_ much, however, seeing the same icon a couple of times
> >> in the same view (some up to 6 times and a steady reduction of
> >> ~50%) is also confusing.
> >
> > I usually use the type-ahead feature to find the icon I want to use.
> > There of course, names are very important. But as a developer
> > myself I know more about the icon naming schemes etc. than the
> > regular user does (maybe they don't even know about type-ahead
> > search), so for others this feature might not be as important.
> 
> Type-ahead search also searches the "alternative" names, so if you
> type "xfce-filemanager", "file-manager" is filtered.

Ok, that's awesome. :)

> >> > Also, the inconsistency issue (in particular across different
> >> > themes) that you describe in your other mail makes me think that
> >> > this either needs more thought or that we maybe shouldn't do it.
> >> > But then again, I haven't looked into it deeply enough to have a
> >> > strong opinion to bring to the table.
> >>
> >> If we use more spec icon-names, the problem becomes less and less
> >> visible. It could be possible to add a checkbox "hide duplicate
> >> icons", but personally that will only confuse more.
> >
> > True. Keep in mind however that the icon naming spec includes only
> > the basic icon names. I assume that there will be more and more
> > non-standard icon names again in the future because the icon naming
> > spec maintainer(s) are rather reluctant to standardize new ones.
> 
> The code looks for symlinks, it has nothing to do with the spec, but
> the fact it that the spec-name is the real file and alternative names
> are symlinks to this file. So other icons will still show because they
> are real image files.

Yeah, I know. My point only was that the number of icons we can convert
to spec icons is not very big and won't grow a lot. But of course your
arguments remain valid.

So, anyway... if type-ahead search still works, I'm satisifed. :)

  - Jannis