On 18 June 2012 18:52, E. Liddell <ejlddll@...> wrote: > On Mon, 18 Jun 2012 15:20:09 -0700 (PDT) > Darrell Anderson <humanreadable@...> wrote: > >> > > tdelibs/pics/crystalsvg/cr64-mime-koffice.png >> > > tdelibs/pics/crystalsvg/cr22-mime-koffice.png >> > > tdelibs/pics/crystalsvg/cr128-mime-koffice.png >> > > tdelibs/pics/crystalsvg/cr48-mime-koffice.png >> > >> > With respect to these, it is still *K*Office, right? >> > You just need the logo changed? >> > >> > (Also, I'm making the primary changes to >> > crsc-mime-koffice.svgz, which wasn't on your list but needs the update anyway, and >> > will export the fixed-size pngs from that. As a bonus, we get a >> > nice SVG rendering of one of those problem logo-icon-things, which can be >> > reused in other places.) >> >> Yes, thanks for seeing the svgz. Most of the crystalsvg png images likely have a parent svgz. If >>you can edit the svgz and produce the pngs from that then great. That is how I hoped these exercise >>would go: edit once, save many! :-) > > Okay, here are bottom2.png, kde_logo.png, the various mime-koffice images > (22px isn't such a great image, but other methods of scaling it down didn't > produce anything better), and, as a bonus, the extracted logo as both .svgz and > a .png with transparent background. With a little luck, having a drop-in > replacement logo will speed up some of the other fixes (although there are some > places it may not work all that well compositionally). > > Anyway, I'm done for the evening. Hopefully, I'll be able to resume tomorrow. > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: trinity-devel-unsubscribe@... > For additional commands, e-mail: trinity-devel-help@... > Read list messages on the web archive: http://trinity-devel.pearsoncomputing.net/ > Please remember not to top-post: http://trinity.pearsoncomputing.net/mailing_lists/#top-posting Just a comment on the style - Trinity's T logo is all right angles. In these images, the T is slanted (a bit more stylish, but definitely different). Do we use the boring yet context confirming and familiar 90 degree angles, or go with a smooth stylish version?