Re: Icon update

[Jan D.]

Bill Wohler wrote:
> "Jan D." <address@hidden> writes:
>
> > I think the recent changes to the tool bar icons was so that
> > next_node, prev_node and up_node would clearly indicate that we are
> > moving in the node (i.e. document) and not in the history of previous
> > moves (see previous discussion on emacs-devel).  I think the ones you
> > suggest are more of the history kind of icons.
>
> Really? It seems that stock_left and stock_right are usually used for
> history, not stock_next and stock_previous.

You may be right, it was just my first impression, not a well reasearched fact 
:-).

> >                                                There are icons called
> > next-page and previous-page though (attached, no up-page seems to
> > exist).  But these seems to be poorly supported by the themes I have
> > (no theme has customized those icons).
>
> Gnus and MH-E use the next-page icon to indicate paging down within
> the current article/mail message, *not* to the next article/mail
> message. I *think* that's the intent of this icon. 
>
> In other words, stock_next-page is used to page within the current
> article/message/file/node while stock_next is used to go to the next
> article/message/file/node.

I think the distiction is a bit blurred in info.  While you may go to the next 
node (for example, Emacs/Basic/Inserting text to Emacs/Basic/Moving Point), 
you are still within the same topic/article (Emacs and indeed Emacs/Basic).


> You do point out that the arrows are used for history, but in MH-E,
> I'm using them to go to the next and previous message. Whoops.
>
> Now, I would suggest that we take stock_previous and stock_next icons
> from GNOME and use those in info and MH-E. Since the custom next-node
> and prev-node Emacs icons aren't supported by GTK at all, we're no
> worse off and buy consistency between Info, MH-E, and GNOME.

If that OK with those who took part in the previous discussion, it is fine by 
me.

> However, the metaphor between the next and previous icons isn't the
> same as the up and top icons, as shown in the following:

Yes, I think the previous discussion pointed to a lack of icons in the 
Gtk/Gnome set, and I think, but am not sure, that a bug report on that was 
filed as well.

> I don't think we'd want to do this. I'll ask what the GNOME usability
> folks what they recommend we use for these functions and report back
> here.

Ok.

        Jan D.