Oh. Never mind the screen shots. The ooo-dev list apparently does not accept
*.png attachments. I sent them. They did not arrive.
- Dennis
(I did not realize that OOo 3.3.0 was installing those icons because a
different application had set my associations first. Then the OOo 3.3.0-it
install replaced them and so I saw those ODF-tagged ones were actually being
distributed. I didn't realize that.)
-----Original Message-----
From: Dennis E. Hamilton [mailto:dennis.hamilton@acm.org]
Sent: Friday, December 16, 2011 16:41
To: 'ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org'
Subject: RE: old colored vs new monochrome icons
I have no objection to the coloring of the icons.
I object to the use of an "ODF" tag on them with no indication that these are
for implementation-specific file associations. I also failed to include the
illustrative image from my last note. I will correct that.
- Dennis
-----Original Message-----
From: Rob Weir [mailto:robweir@apache.org]
Sent: Friday, December 16, 2011 16:30
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: old colored vs new monochrome icons
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 7:13 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton
<dennis.hamilton@acm.org> wrote:
> Rob,
>
> As far as I am concerned, unless those icons are issued by the OASIS ODF
> Adoption TC, in a way that they are usable with anyone's ODF-supporting file
> associations, that discussion doesn't count. (If the OASIS ODF Adoption TC
> did something like that, that would be cool and consistent with the notion
> of making ODF support visible.)
>
Honestly, I have no idea what you're talking about at this point.
Do you have any objections with the proposal that has been made about
coloring the icons? Or do you have a different set of icons that you
want to counter-propose with?
-Rob
|