From owner-freebsd-hackers Thu Apr 29 4:53: 1 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from ns.nobell.com (ns.nobell.com [216.140.184.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC11014DF2 for ; Thu, 29 Apr 1999 04:52:59 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from rkw@dataplex.net) Received: from [216.140.184.150] (st84150.nobell.com [216.140.184.150]) by ns.nobell.com (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id GAA89418; Thu, 29 Apr 1999 06:52:43 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from rkw@dataplex.net) X-Sender: rkw@mail.dataplex.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199904291057.GAA20645@lakes.dignus.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 29 Apr 1999 06:48:32 -0500 To: Thomas David Rivers From: Richard Wackerbarth Subject: Re: Adding desktop support Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG At 5:57 AM -0500 4/29/99, Thomas David Rivers wrote: > I point out that if the executable has no icon in it, then this > "overrides" from the window manager would come into play, right? > > Since the "overrides" have to be there anyway - what's the advantage > of putting the icon in the exe? I think that you miss the hierarchy of "defaults". If the USER has specified the icon for the entity, use his, else if the AUTHOR provided an icon, use it, else if the USER gave a default to the window manager, ... else if the WM-AUTHOR, ... else use a totally generic icon. - - - - Keeping the AUTHOR supplied information in one place certainly has advantages. Richard Wackerbarth To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message