[ubuntu-art] Quick Update
gthompson at cogeco.ca
Sun Jun 25 23:36:07 BST 2006
Kenneth Wimer wrote:
> On Jun 25, 2006, at 11:23 PM, Michiel Sikma wrote:
>>> On Jun 25, 2006, at 8:25 PM, Kenneth Wimer wrote:
>>>> On Jun 25, 2006, at 7:21 PM, Michiel Sikma wrote:
>>>>> On Jun 25, 2006, at 4:31 PM, Troy James Sobotka wrote:
>>>>> This will require some new language.
>>>>> Basically, Human icons are in and staying -- as per sabdfl.
>>>>> This will be a component of the 'Human Look', which is what
>>>>> we are sticking with (albeit trying to finish it, polish it,
>>>>> and finish the set.)
>>>> I don't understand why it is so pertinently important to keep Human
>>>> in. In all objectivity, it's simply a suboptimal icon set when
>>>> compared to Tango. I also don't see why any of the arguments that I
>>>> have given have to be ignored. Like I stated, Human doesn't seem to
>>>> follow any proper guidelines at all. If it does, then I would like
>>>> to read their rationale for arbitrarily designing some icons from
>>>> different angles.
>>> I see it as a good decision for branding the gnome desktop for an
>>> Ubuntu product. I do not think you are being ignored but rather that
>>> your opinion differs from others, especially those who make the
>>> decisions for artwork inclusion in the aforementioned product. Note
>>> as well that in artwork, guidelines are great, but for every rule
>>> there is an exception.
>> I don't think it's just my opinion that differs. As I've mentioned
>> before, I've got valid criticism for the Human icon set. I simply
>> believe it to be inferior to Tangerine/Tango for various reasons.
>> Generally, I feel as though this same opinion exists among more
>> members of the art community.
> Until now, this opinion is not exactly a consensus. As noted
> previously in other mails, some of these decisions are not up to us as
> a democratic entity.
>> I also don't see why you simply say "guidelines are great, but we
>> make exceptions".
> Note that I did not say that "we make exceptions" but rather that all
> rules have exceptions in the real world.
>> I don't see why you can just admit that some of the icons in the
>> Human set are inconsistent.
> I have not denied this fact, but simply tried to explain why it is so.
> There is also a valid reason to brand a project so that it stands out
> as an individual within the greater group of related projects.
>> To me, it sounds like you're just saying "it's been decided, you
>> don't have any say in it, let's smother this discussion". I disagree
>> with such an attitude.
> I am saying that "it has been decided, we all stated our opinions and
> sometimes not everyone can be pleased. I also added that if you are
> interesed in this, please feel free to work on it in a group with
> those who share your opinion, just do not expect everyone to share
> your opinion. Sometimes artwork in the real world is like that
>> Don't get me wrong, though. I don't think that the Human icon set is
>> bad by any standard, but I simply feel that a more open process would
>> enable us to get rid of such things. It's imperative that
>> inconsistency is taken care of in any case. This doesn't take away
>> that most of the icons in the system should just come from
>> Tangerine/Tango, as the Tango icon set is likely to be the style of
>> icons for _all_ default application icons in the future. It will most
>> definitely become very popular, and I don't think it is a good idea
>> for Ubuntu to say no to that style because "we want it to be a little
> It is not a case of wanting it to be a little different, but rather to
> make it look distinctively Ubuntu and beautiful.
>>> Seeing as the decision has already been made I suggest you produce a
>>> viable alternative by working in a group with other like-minded
>>> individuals - if the result is seen as better in everyones eyes than
>>> what exists now we can perhaps change this decision in future releases.
>> I don't see why. The Tangerine/Tango set already exists, is more
>> complete, has more people working on it, has a more open design
>> process, also makes Ubuntu ready for the future concerning design
>> consistency. Just because some people felt it was necessary to say no
>> to it for Dapper doesn't mean it shouldn't be possible to re-evaluate
>> it for Edgy.
> The cycle for edgy is well underway, and due to the later release of
> Dapper a few months shorter than expected. This fact alone is enough
> for one to come to the opinion that we should fix what is there rather
> than start with a whole new set of problems (which we first have to
> discover, document, etc. before we can even fix them).
> --ubuntu-art mailing list
> ubuntu-art at lists.ubuntu.com
This should be interesting, I'll be working my new theme proposal so
that it still works good with the Human icon set (would Silver, Orange,
and Green work better than Cyan?)
More information about the ubuntu-art