[ubuntu-art] Human iconset is incomplete and inconsistent

Alexander van Loon svloon at xs4all.nl
Sat Jun 23 20:45:14 BST 2007

On Sun, 2007-05-13 at 07:52 -0700, Troy James Sobotka wrote:
> Once again, that silly word 'professional' pops up.
> This is a subjective terms and relative strictly to your vantage.  It
> also, in this case, happens to be rooted in a rather poor judgment call.
> The icons were designed by IconFactory -- the company that also happens
> to have a rather vast resume including creating output for such little
> known corporations as Microsoft.
> Your complaints are aesthetic, and you _might_ have people who agree
> with you.  That said, if you predicate your complaints based on terms
> that try to legitimize your complaint as something more than an
> aesthetic argument, not many people are likely to listen.
> To answer your question, Mr. Shuttleworth has stated that his aesthetic
> disagrees with Tango / Tangerine's.  While some view his stance on the
> icon selection as dictatorial and within his rights (sabdfl --
> remember?) he is certainly not alone on the dismissal of Tango /
> Tangerine on aesthetic grounds.
> Hope this helps...

On Sun, 2007-05-13 at 15:16 +0100, Alex Jones wrote:
> Hi
> Not that you don't make any valid points, but this email is full of
> personal opinions. Personally, I think that the Tango theme
> looks /horrible/, in particular the file browser, volume control, logout
> and network manager icons. The Human theme is really much nicer to me.
> However, I completely agree that the attitude to mix Human and Tango
> does not work - they are very different looks.
> Unfortunately, there is no Human style guidelines, so nobody can create
> their own Human icons properly. I think part of the problem is that
> Human is an IconFactory production. Our own efforts to develop the set
> have already resulted in inconsistency. (Right click your desktop and
> see the difference between the star emblem in the Create Folder and
> Create Document icons.)
> Either we come up with new style guidelines to "rival" Tango, or we
> retroactively develop them for Human and start making it all better.

Ok, I forgot that I was voicing a personal opinion, and I shouldn't have
used the word "unprofessional". But let's try to limit it to the facts:

1. The Human iconset is not complete, less complete than Tango for
2. Currently the Tango/GNOME and Human iconset are being mixed.
3. There are no style guidelines or color palette for the Human

Because of #2 there is inconsistency. As a likely consequence of #3,
because of the missing style guidelines and color palette, the icons
which are part of the set are probably not as consistent than in the
case they were not missing.

My question is then, does the Ubuntu (Art) development team and sabdfl
see these three facts as problems? If so, will something be done to
solve these problems?

More information about the ubuntu-art mailing list