[Lazarus] Component icons howto ?
Michael Van Canneyt
michael at freepascal.org
Wed Mar 30 09:57:07 CEST 2022
On Wed, 30 Mar 2022, Ondrej Pokorny via lazarus wrote:
> On 29.03.2022 19:45, Michael Van Canneyt via lazarus wrote:
>> On Tue, 29 Mar 2022, Werner Pamler wrote:
>>> I don't know the actual procedure names ATM, but imagine that when the
>>> message window needs a "warning" icon (which is - say - 12x12 at 96ppi)
>>> then the scaling procedure at 192ppi only needs to look for
>>> "warning_200.png". If the exact image size would have been included in the
>>> file name instead ("warning_24x24.png"), it would have to know the size of
>>> the base image at 96ppi in order to select the right image. A little
>> I fail to see the link between 192 and 200. This requires people to know
>> that 96dpi and 144 dpi and 192 dpi are 100, 150 and 200 % of a standard
> Forget about the DPI/PPI values. What you need is the %-scaling factor of the
> original size.
Why do you think I know this is a scaling factor ?
I didn't have a clue until Werner explained.
Sorry, you can argue all you like, but if I see a list of icon files xyz_24x24.png
then I know *exactly* what to create, just from the filenames.
No need to do math, open file whatnot.
With your method, I need to open the file (unless I know standard size is
24), check the size, and then possibly multiply (if I know that the suffix
is the scaling factor in %).
As it was, I actually opened 3 files to see what the needed sizes were.
By contrast, if I need to create icons for a Linux app I check e.g:
> ls /usr/share/icons/gnome/
128x128/ 16x16/ 22x22/ 24x24/ 256x256/ 32x32/ 48x48/ 512x512/ 64x64/ 8x8/ icon-theme.cache index.theme scalable/
and I know exactly what to create, just from the names.
If you think that your method is easier, we have very different concepts of what is 'easy'.
Clearly, I would not be asking these questions if it was so obvious.
More information about the lazarus