Re: new toolbar icons are problematic

[Dave Love]

"Jan D." <address@hidden> writes:

> GTK requires it because the whole toolbar is done in GTK.

[Sorry, I'm not arguing or anything, just explaining why I thought it
wasn't required.]

> For other toolkits, Emacs does the toolbar by itself, using X
> primitives.  But I do think transparency is required.

It isn't required to have transparency in the image format.  Check the
Gnus icons, for instance.  I never bothered to alter them because they
worked fine asis.  (I did the original work on populating the
toolbar on top of gerd's basic support.)

> When libXpm is used, that library builds the mask for the icon by
> looking at the transparent parts of the icon.

I assume it never gets the chance because Emacs builds the mask itself
-- see toolbar.el.  I don't know what happens at the lower levels,
though, and I don't know how this interacts with gtk.

> No transparency would mean a fixed background
> colour, which might not correspond to the toolbar background.

You can see that isn't the case in practice.

I don't have any objection to fixing the icons for transparency or
using XPM.  The only reason for suggesting PPM (or whatever it is) was
for systems which don't do XPM, especially Windows.