On Tue, 04 Jan 2005 12:33:51 -0600, Derek P. Moore <derekm@...606...> wrote:
Ideally it would be permanent. It's the Right Way To Do It(tm);
You haven't convinced me still.
1. rsvg is broken. Talk people who are drawing icons in Inkscape to be rendered by rsvg (e.g. Brisgeek). There are lots of complaints. I don't want this problem for us.
2. Drawing icons consistently is much easier when they are in one file.
3. Loading them from one file is faster too.
4. Don't Fix What Is Not Broken (TM). I see no real problems with the current implementation. If it was possible to use it with GTK, I'm sure it's possible to use it with gtkmm as well. With the necessary support code, passing an id to get an icon is just as easy as passing a filename.
5. We still need infrastructure for rendering things like marker previews. Rendering icons is very similar, so I don't see why we need another renderer.
makes for the simplest, most straight-forward code; and what difference does it make whether icons are rendered with Inkscape's renderer or librsvg?
There are many differences in quality and compliance.
amounts of small icons and simple graphics for GNOME. It may not be as high quality or compliant, but it's not supposed to be a super leet drawing app, and it's likely much faster than Inkscape's renderer at putting the icons into a pixbuf.)
Even with our current slow-as-hell renderer, rendering icons are in no way a speed bottleneck.
Also, the icon is only rendered once by rsvg's gdk-pixbuf loader when its put into the IconFactory. Whereas, in Inkscape's "proprietary" way of handling icons, the SVG is rendered each time its displayed in a different location (e.g., toolbar icon of 'zoom_select' vs. menu item icon of 'zoom_select').
That's not such a big problem. We're not going to use the same icon in hundreds of places.
Have a look at how simply icons are done in the Gtkmm code: http://cvs.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.py/inkscape/experimental/bryce/inkscape_g...
Currently it's just as easy, except that you use ids not filenames.