# icons **URL:** \ **Category:** Development\ **Created:** [January 13, 2009, 7:50pm UTC](https://forum.vassalengine.org/t/icons/1469 "2009-01-13T19:50:46Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![mkiefte](https://forum.vassalengine.org/user_avatar/forum.vassalengine.org/mkiefte/32/25_2.png) [@mkiefte](https://forum.vassalengine.org/u/mkiefte)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2009, 7:50pm UTC](https://forum.vassalengine.org/t/icons/1469/1 "2009-01-13T19:50:46Z")
Since we have icons in trunk/src/icons/MxN/\*.png, why can’t we have tango icons for buttons? Actually, forget it. It’s because we don’t want to screw around with preferences just before the release of 3.1. So here’s a different question: since we’re going to go to tango anyway, why can’t we just substitute tango icons for the ones we have so that the transition to scalable icons will just seem like a natural progression. I just hate the default icons. - M. ---
**Author:** ![uckelman](https://forum.vassalengine.org/user_avatar/forum.vassalengine.org/uckelman/32/10020_2.png) [@uckelman](https://forum.vassalengine.org/u/uckelman)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2009, 8:11pm UTC](https://forum.vassalengine.org/t/icons/1469/2 "2009-01-13T20:11:05Z")
Thus spake “mkiefte”: > [@](#): > > So here’s a different question: since we’re going to go to tango anyway, why > can’t we just substitute tango icons for the ones we have so that the transit > ion to scalable icons will just seem like a natural progression. Right at the moment there is not a complete substitute set, and having a mix is going to look worse than the old ones. – J. * * * Messages mailing list [Messages@forums.vassalengine.org](mailto:Messages@forums.vassalengine.org) [forums.vassalengine.org/mailman/ … engine.org](http://forums.vassalengine.org/mailman/listinfo/messages_forums.vassalengine.org) Post generated using Mail2Forum ([mail2forum.com](http://www.mail2forum.com)) ---
**Author:** ![mkiefte](https://forum.vassalengine.org/user_avatar/forum.vassalengine.org/mkiefte/32/25_2.png) [@mkiefte](https://forum.vassalengine.org/u/mkiefte)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2009, 8:29pm UTC](https://forum.vassalengine.org/t/icons/1469/3 "2009-01-13T20:29:11Z")
> [@](#): > > Right at the moment there is not a complete substitute set, and having a mix > is going to look worse than the old ones. I almost have a complete set. What if I could get a complete set together before we go to 3.1-final? - M. Post generated using Mail2Forum ([mail2forum.com](http://www.mail2forum.com)) ---
**Author:** ![uckelman](https://forum.vassalengine.org/user_avatar/forum.vassalengine.org/uckelman/32/10020_2.png) [@uckelman](https://forum.vassalengine.org/u/uckelman)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2009, 8:45pm UTC](https://forum.vassalengine.org/t/icons/1469/4 "2009-01-13T20:45:56Z")
Thus spake “Michael Kiefte”: > [@](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > Right at the moment there is not a complete substitute set, and having a > > mix > > is going to look worse than the old ones. > > I almost have a complete set. What if I could get a complete set together > before we go to 3.1-final? If we had a complete set which followed the guidelines and looked good, then we could swap them in for the old 16x16 icons, as that’s pretty low-risk. But I don’t think that it’s a good idea to add the multi-size icon support right before releasing 3.1. – J. * * * Messages mailing list [Messages@forums.vassalengine.org](mailto:Messages@forums.vassalengine.org) [forums.vassalengine.org/mailman/ … engine.org](http://forums.vassalengine.org/mailman/listinfo/messages_forums.vassalengine.org) Post generated using Mail2Forum ([mail2forum.com](http://www.mail2forum.com)) ---
**Author:** ![mkiefte](https://forum.vassalengine.org/user_avatar/forum.vassalengine.org/mkiefte/32/25_2.png) [@mkiefte](https://forum.vassalengine.org/u/mkiefte)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2009, 12:13am UTC](https://forum.vassalengine.org/t/icons/1469/5 "2009-01-14T00:13:44Z")
No, I had no intention of providing full scalable icon support. However, I’d be quite keen to have tango-like icons instead of the ones we have. I have almost a full set already. - M On 13/01/2009, Joel Uckelman [uckelman@nomic.net](mailto:uckelman@nomic.net) wrote: > [@](#): > > Thus spake “Michael Kiefte”: > > > [@](#): > > > > > [@](#): > > > > > > Right at the moment there is not a complete substitute set, and having a > > > mix > > > is going to look worse than the old ones. > > > > I almost have a complete set. What if I could get a complete set together > > before we go to 3.1-final? > > If we had a complete set which followed the guidelines and looked good, then > we could swap them in for the old 16x16 icons, as that’s pretty low-risk. > But > I don’t think that it’s a good idea to add the multi-size icon support right > before releasing 3.1. > > – > J. > > * * * > > Messages mailing list > [Messages@forums.vassalengine.org](mailto:Messages@forums.vassalengine.org) > [forums.vassalengine.org/mailman/ … engine.org](http://forums.vassalengine.org/mailman/listinfo/messages_forums.vassalengine.org) – Michael Kiefte, Ph.D. Associate Professor School of Human Communication Disorders Dalhousie University Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada tel: +1 902 494 5150 fax: +1 902 494 5151 * * * Messages mailing list [Messages@forums.vassalengine.org](mailto:Messages@forums.vassalengine.org) [forums.vassalengine.org/mailman/ … engine.org](http://forums.vassalengine.org/mailman/listinfo/messages_forums.vassalengine.org) Post generated using Mail2Forum ([mail2forum.com](http://www.mail2forum.com)) ---
**Author:** ![uckelman](https://forum.vassalengine.org/user_avatar/forum.vassalengine.org/uckelman/32/10020_2.png) [@uckelman](https://forum.vassalengine.org/u/uckelman)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2009, 12:22am UTC](https://forum.vassalengine.org/t/icons/1469/6 "2009-01-14T00:22:22Z")
Thus spake “Michael Kiefte”: > [@](#): > > No, I had no intention of providing full scalable icon support. > However, I’d be quite keen to have tango-like icons instead of the > ones we have. I have almost a full set already. Oh, that’s really too bad, because the default toolbar icons on most platforms are not 16x16 like we have now. They’re either 22x22 or 24x24, so if you’re making a 16x16 set only, those won’t be in use very long. – J. * * * Messages mailing list [Messages@forums.vassalengine.org](mailto:Messages@forums.vassalengine.org) [forums.vassalengine.org/mailman/ … engine.org](http://forums.vassalengine.org/mailman/listinfo/messages_forums.vassalengine.org) Post generated using Mail2Forum ([mail2forum.com](http://www.mail2forum.com)) ---
**Author:** ![mkiefte](https://forum.vassalengine.org/user_avatar/forum.vassalengine.org/mkiefte/32/25_2.png) [@mkiefte](https://forum.vassalengine.org/u/mkiefte)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2009, 1:50am UTC](https://forum.vassalengine.org/t/icons/1469/7 "2009-01-14T01:50:47Z")
Actually, I was thinking of 32x32. 16x16 wouldn’t be worth the trouble. But now I see the problem. Anything but 16x16 is going to mess up the the toolbar of existingn modules. -.M On 13/01/2009, Joel Uckelman [uckelman@nomic.net](mailto:uckelman@nomic.net) wrote: > [@](#): > > Thus spake “Michael Kiefte”: > > > [@](#): > > > > No, I had no intention of providing full scalable icon support. > > However, I’d be quite keen to have tango-like icons instead of the > > ones we have. I have almost a full set already. > > Oh, that’s really too bad, because the default toolbar icons on most > platforms are not 16x16 like we have now. They’re either 22x22 or 24x24, > so if you’re making a 16x16 set only, those won’t be in use very long. > > – > J. > > * * * > > Messages mailing list > [Messages@forums.vassalengine.org](mailto:Messages@forums.vassalengine.org) > [forums.vassalengine.org/mailman/ … engine.org](http://forums.vassalengine.org/mailman/listinfo/messages_forums.vassalengine.org) – Michael Kiefte, Ph.D. Associate Professor School of Human Communication Disorders Dalhousie University Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada tel: +1 902 494 5150 fax: +1 902 494 5151 * * * Messages mailing list [Messages@forums.vassalengine.org](mailto:Messages@forums.vassalengine.org) [forums.vassalengine.org/mailman/ … engine.org](http://forums.vassalengine.org/mailman/listinfo/messages_forums.vassalengine.org) Post generated using Mail2Forum ([mail2forum.com](http://www.mail2forum.com)) ---
**Author:** ![Brent\_Easton](https://forum.vassalengine.org/user_avatar/forum.vassalengine.org/brent_easton/32/10_2.png) [@Brent\_Easton](https://forum.vassalengine.org/u/Brent_Easton)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2009, 3:00am UTC](https://forum.vassalengine.org/t/icons/1469/8 "2009-01-14T03:00:43Z")
> [@](#): > > Actually, I was thinking of 32x32. 16x16 wouldn’t be worth the trouble. > > But now I see the problem. Anything but 16x16 is going to mess up the > the toolbar of existingn modules. Currently, when you specify an image for a toolbar button, you specify a specific instance of an image that is a specific size. What I envisage is that when specifying toolbar images, you specify the name of an ‘Icon Family’ instead. An Icon Family is the set of all icons with the same name in each of the Tango sizes (well, our expanded set of sizes). The actual size of the icon would be specified by a Global preference. You change the size in the preference and presto, all the toolbars icons resize. I had a little demo of this running and it worked great. The drawbacks will be with modules that specify custom toolbar icons of varying sizes and do not want them all to be the same size. The code I wrote for Icon Family’s neatly handles non-Tango images also. It uses the specified image name as a base icon and generates the Tango sizes from it by scaling. This would allow all existing modules to have auto-resizing toolbars, even if they use custom images. B. * * * Messages mailing list [Messages@forums.vassalengine.org](mailto:Messages@forums.vassalengine.org) [forums.vassalengine.org/mailman/ … engine.org](http://forums.vassalengine.org/mailman/listinfo/messages_forums.vassalengine.org) Post generated using Mail2Forum ([mail2forum.com](http://www.mail2forum.com)) ---
**Author:** ![Brent\_Easton](https://forum.vassalengine.org/user_avatar/forum.vassalengine.org/brent_easton/32/10_2.png) [@Brent\_Easton](https://forum.vassalengine.org/u/Brent_Easton)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2009, 3:02am UTC](https://forum.vassalengine.org/t/icons/1469/9 "2009-01-14T03:02:41Z")
> [@](#): > > Thus spake “Michael Kiefte”: > > > [@](#): > > > > No, I had no intention of providing full scalable icon support. > > However, I’d be quite keen to have tango-like icons instead of the > > ones we have. I have almost a full set already. > > Oh, that’s really too bad, because the default toolbar icons on most > platforms are not 16x16 like we have now. They’re either 22x22 or 24x24, > so if you’re making a 16x16 set only, those won’t be in use very long. Yes, that’s right. I don’t see much point in replacing the current icons unless it is with a full set covering the major sizes. At this point, I don’t think we should do anything with icons at all in 3.1, but make it a priority in 3.2 B. * * * Messages mailing list [Messages@forums.vassalengine.org](mailto:Messages@forums.vassalengine.org) [forums.vassalengine.org/mailman/ … engine.org](http://forums.vassalengine.org/mailman/listinfo/messages_forums.vassalengine.org) Post generated using Mail2Forum ([mail2forum.com](http://www.mail2forum.com)) ---
**Author:** ![Brent\_Easton](https://forum.vassalengine.org/user_avatar/forum.vassalengine.org/brent_easton/32/10_2.png) [@Brent\_Easton](https://forum.vassalengine.org/u/Brent_Easton)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2009, 3:47am UTC](https://forum.vassalengine.org/t/icons/1469/10 "2009-01-14T03:47:32Z")
Joel, I noticed you have created a icons/24x24 directory with a Vassal icon it. 24x24 is a non Tango size and I had not planned on supporting it. B. * * * Messages mailing list [Messages@forums.vassalengine.org](mailto:Messages@forums.vassalengine.org) [forums.vassalengine.org/mailman/ … engine.org](http://forums.vassalengine.org/mailman/listinfo/messages_forums.vassalengine.org) Post generated using Mail2Forum ([mail2forum.com](http://www.mail2forum.com)) ---
**Author:** ![uckelman](https://forum.vassalengine.org/user_avatar/forum.vassalengine.org/uckelman/32/10020_2.png) [@uckelman](https://forum.vassalengine.org/u/uckelman)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2009, 8:25am UTC](https://forum.vassalengine.org/t/icons/1469/11 "2009-01-14T08:25:31Z")
Thus spake “Brent Easton”: > [@](#): > > Joel, > > I noticed you have created a icons/24x24 directory with a Vassal icon it. 24x > 24 is a non Tango size and I had not planned on supporting it. > > B. 24x24 is a strange case. Toolbar icons are 24x24 in Windows, and were once that size in GNOME. For Windows, the right thing to do is to take the 22x22 icons and add a 1px transparent border around them, which can be done on the fly—thus there would be no need for a 24x24 directory. However, there is one icon which (on Windows) we need at startup when we call setIconImages() to set the app icons. Again, in this case the sole difference between the 22x22 app icon and the 24x24 one is a 1px transparent border, so I could just create that at load-time, and then we wouldn’t need the 24x24 size at all. – J. * * * Messages mailing list [Messages@forums.vassalengine.org](mailto:Messages@forums.vassalengine.org) [forums.vassalengine.org/mailman/ … engine.org](http://forums.vassalengine.org/mailman/listinfo/messages_forums.vassalengine.org) Post generated using Mail2Forum ([mail2forum.com](http://www.mail2forum.com)) ---
**Author:** ![Brent\_Easton](https://forum.vassalengine.org/user_avatar/forum.vassalengine.org/brent_easton/32/10_2.png) [@Brent\_Easton](https://forum.vassalengine.org/u/Brent_Easton)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2009, 11:34am UTC](https://forum.vassalengine.org/t/icons/1469/12 "2009-01-14T11:34:04Z")
> [@](#): > > 24x24 is a strange case. Toolbar icons are 24x24 in Windows, and were once > that size in GNOME. For Windows, the right thing to do is to take the 22x22 > icons and add a 1px transparent border around them, which can be done on > the fly—thus there would be no need for a 24x24 directory. However, there > is one icon which (on Windows) we need at startup when we call > setIconImages() to set the app icons. Again, in this case the sole > difference > between the 22x22 app icon and the 24x24 one is a 1px transparent border, > so I could just create that at load-time, and then we wouldn’t need the > 24x24 size at all. If you don;t want to handle it on the fly, then there are two options to handle this. Create the 24x24 image with the border, call it vassal24.png and put it in the icons/scalable folder. I will add an extra method to my 3.2 software that allows you to request a non-standard sized icon. You’ll do something like IconFactory.getSizedIcon(“Vassal24”, 24) instead of the normal IconFactory.getIcon(“Vassal24”, IconFamily.SMALL). My software checks if a scalable icon is already the correct size and will just return the base icon. If you don’t like that, I would just put it in the images directory and load it as we do now. * * * Messages mailing list [Messages@forums.vassalengine.org](mailto:Messages@forums.vassalengine.org) [forums.vassalengine.org/mailman/ … engine.org](http://forums.vassalengine.org/mailman/listinfo/messages_forums.vassalengine.org) Post generated using Mail2Forum ([mail2forum.com](http://www.mail2forum.com)) ---
**Author:** ![uckelman](https://forum.vassalengine.org/user_avatar/forum.vassalengine.org/uckelman/32/10020_2.png) [@uckelman](https://forum.vassalengine.org/u/uckelman)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2009, 11:59am UTC](https://forum.vassalengine.org/t/icons/1469/13 "2009-01-14T11:59:23Z")
Thus spake “Brent Easton”: > [@](#): > > If you don;t want to handle it on the fly, then there are two options to hand > le this. It’s ok building the 24x24 image at startup, as we’re loading the 22x22 image anyway. (In fact, it will probably be faster to build the 24x24 image than to read it from disk, since when building it all of the operations will occur in memory.) > [@](#): > > I will add an extra method to my 3.2 software that allows you to request a no > n-standard sized icon. You’ll do something like IconFactory.getSizedIcon(“Vas > sal24”, 24) instead of the normal IconFactory.getIcon(“Vassal24”, IconFamily. > SMALL). My software checks if a scalable icon is already the correct size and > will just return the base icon. > > If you don’t like that, I would just put it in the images directory and load > it as we do now. What I’d really like is to be able to request icons using the named Tango sizes (large, medium, small, extra small) rather than numbers, and receive 24x24 icons when I request “small” on Windows, but 22x22 icons when I request “small” everywhere else. I’m thinking now that we really shouldn’t define directories for sizes other than the standard ones, as doing so might encourage people to create icons at weird sizes. – J. * * * Messages mailing list [Messages@forums.vassalengine.org](mailto:Messages@forums.vassalengine.org) [forums.vassalengine.org/mailman/ … engine.org](http://forums.vassalengine.org/mailman/listinfo/messages_forums.vassalengine.org) Post generated using Mail2Forum ([mail2forum.com](http://www.mail2forum.com)) ---
**Author:** ![uckelman](https://forum.vassalengine.org/user_avatar/forum.vassalengine.org/uckelman/32/10020_2.png) [@uckelman](https://forum.vassalengine.org/u/uckelman)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2009, 12:41pm UTC](https://forum.vassalengine.org/t/icons/1469/14 "2009-01-14T12:41:44Z")
Thus spake “Brent Easton”: > [@](#): > > If you don;t want to handle it on the fly, then there are two options to hand > le this. > > Create the 24x24 image with the border, call it vassal24.png and put it in th > e icons/scalable folder. > > I will add an extra method to my 3.2 software that allows you to request a no > n-standard sized icon. You’ll do something like IconFactory.getSizedIcon(“Vas > sal24”, 24) instead of the normal IconFactory.getIcon(“Vassal24”, IconFamily. > SMALL). My software checks if a scalable icon is already the correct size and > will just return the base icon. > > If you don’t like that, I would just put it in the images directory and load > it as we do now. I’ve removed the 24x24 icon directory, and replaced it by a block of code in VASSAL.tools.ApplicationIcons which creates the 24x24 app icon from the 22x22 one. (In 3.2, we can move these 7 lines into some icon support class, since they’d be needed for all 24x24 icons in Windows.) That still leaves the issue of the 256x256 icon. The only reason it exists is that MS recommends that there be a 256x256 app icon. Nothing else uses it—the 256x256 icon for the Mac is in the ICNS file, and it won’t be used on Linux. We’re not likely to have any other 256x256 icons, as no icon used internally would ever be used at that size. (A 256x256 button?!) So for this one I’m inclined to remove the 256x256 icon directory and stash this icon in images/. It’s a one-off, so there’s no good reason for it to complicate our icon library. – J. * * * Messages mailing list [Messages@forums.vassalengine.org](mailto:Messages@forums.vassalengine.org) [forums.vassalengine.org/mailman/ … engine.org](http://forums.vassalengine.org/mailman/listinfo/messages_forums.vassalengine.org) Post generated using Mail2Forum ([mail2forum.com](http://www.mail2forum.com)) ---
**Author:** ![Brent\_Easton](https://forum.vassalengine.org/user_avatar/forum.vassalengine.org/brent_easton/32/10_2.png) [@Brent\_Easton](https://forum.vassalengine.org/u/Brent_Easton)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2009, 8:21am UTC](https://forum.vassalengine.org/t/icons/1469/15 "2009-01-18T08:21:33Z")
swampwallaby-work@4919 and 4920 has the lowest level code for supporting Tango Icons. To get an appropriately sized Icon, you make the following call: Icon bug = IconFactory.getIcon(“bug”, IconFamily.LARGE) Sizes can be one of IconFamily.XSMALL = 0 // (16x16) IconFamily.SMALL = 1 // (22x22) IconFamily.MEDIUM = 2 // (32x32) IconFamily.LARGE = 3 // (48x48) The icons themselves should be loaded into the directories icons/16x16 icons/22x22 icons/32x32 icons/48x48 icons/scalable At a minimum, you must supply at least an image in the scalable directory. IconFamily will generate any other requested sizes which don’t have a specific size icon from the scalable icon. Supplied images can be any type (.svg, .png, .gif, .jpg), though quality will obviously suffer if sensible choices are not made for the scalable icon. B. * * * Messages mailing list [Messages@forums.vassalengine.org](mailto:Messages@forums.vassalengine.org) [forums.vassalengine.org/mailman/ … engine.org](http://forums.vassalengine.org/mailman/listinfo/messages_forums.vassalengine.org) Post generated using Mail2Forum ([mail2forum.com](http://www.mail2forum.com)) ---
**Author:** ![uckelman](https://forum.vassalengine.org/user_avatar/forum.vassalengine.org/uckelman/32/10020_2.png) [@uckelman](https://forum.vassalengine.org/u/uckelman)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2009, 2:00pm UTC](https://forum.vassalengine.org/t/icons/1469/16 "2009-01-19T14:00:00Z")
Thus spake “Brent Easton”: > [@](#): > > swampwallaby-work@4919 and 4920 has the lowest level code for supporting Tang > o Icons. > > To get an appropriately sized Icon, you make the following call: > > Icon bug = IconFactory.getIcon(“bug”, IconFamily.LARGE) > > Sizes can be one of > > IconFamily.XSMALL = 0 // (16x16) > IconFamily.SMALL = 1 // (22x22) > IconFamily.MEDIUM = 2 // (32x32) > IconFamily.LARGE = 3 // (48x48) > > The icons themselves should be loaded into the directories > > icons/16x16 > icons/22x22 > icons/32x32 > icons/48x48 > icons/scalable > > At a minimum, you must supply at least an image in the scalable directory. Ic > onFamily will generate any other requested sizes which don’t have a specific > size icon from the scalable icon. > > Supplied images can be any type (.svg, .png, .gif, .jpg), though quality will > obviously suffer if sensible choices are not made for the scalable icon. Should we include a message dialog suggesting that people use SVG when they try to add a bitmap for the scalable icon? Comments on IconFactory: 1. I would not spell “iconFamilys” that way. Shouldn’t it be “iconFamilies”? Or is this a difference between American English and Australian English I’m not aware of? 2. Why use a TreeMap instead of a HashMap here? The main reason to use a TreeMap is if you need to preserve the insertion order, but I don’t see anything but puts and gets against the map here. 3. Should initVassalIconFamilys() be public? It looks like it should only ever be called fromt the IconFactory ctor. 4. Should IconFactory be a singleton? It might be cleaner to have all of the state be members of the single IconFactory instance, and use getInstance() to fetch that. – J. * * * Messages mailing list [Messages@forums.vassalengine.org](mailto:Messages@forums.vassalengine.org) [forums.vassalengine.org/mailman/ … engine.org](http://forums.vassalengine.org/mailman/listinfo/messages_forums.vassalengine.org) Post generated using Mail2Forum ([mail2forum.com](http://www.mail2forum.com)) ---
**Author:** ![Brent\_Easton](https://forum.vassalengine.org/user_avatar/forum.vassalengine.org/brent_easton/32/10_2.png) [@Brent\_Easton](https://forum.vassalengine.org/u/Brent_Easton)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2009, 8:35pm UTC](https://forum.vassalengine.org/t/icons/1469/17 "2009-01-19T20:35:21Z")
Joel, > [@](#): > > Should we include a message dialog suggesting that people use SVG when they > try to add a bitmap for the scalable icon? This is only stage 1 of the Icon code to allow developers to access Icons we have loaded directly into Vassal. I haven’t written te bit that allows developers to load their own Icon Families into a module. (That bit isn’t needed until we modify LaunchButton to use Icon Families). At that point, we can give people a gently reminder that scalable icons ‘ought’ to be svg. However, as far as the software is concerned, there is no reason for the scalable icon to be svg. A bitmap icon will be scaled just as happily, with satisfactory results. Similiarly a size icon could be a tweaked svg icon. In fact, if you provide Icons in all 4 of the Tango sizes, there is no need to include a scalable icon at all as it will never be used. > [@](#): > > Comments on IconFactory: > > 1. I would not spell “iconFamilys” that way. Shouldn’t it be > “iconFamilies”? > Or is this a difference between American English and Australian English I’m > not aware of? Oh, yes, I guess so. > [@](#): > > 1. Why use a TreeMap instead of a HashMap here? The main reason to use a > TreeMap is if you need to preserve the insertion order, but I don’t see > anything but puts and gets against the map here. I thought the reason to use a TreeMap was to allow you to traverse the keys in a sorted order? Stage 1 doesn’t use this, but later, we will need to generate a list of available Icons in a Icon Family Picker. Since this only will only happen in the Editor, it makes sense to just sort the Family names in the IconFamilyPicker. > [@](#): > > 1. Should initVassalIconFamilys() be public? It looks like it should only > ever be called fromt the IconFactory ctor. Yes, you are correct. > [@](#): > > 1. Should IconFactory be a singleton? It might be cleaner to have all of > the state be members of the single IconFactory instance, and use > getInstance() to fetch that. I wonder sometimes about the usefulness of the Singleton pattern. Only one instance of IconFactory will ever be created and I certainly don’t want the call to get an Icon to be IconFactory.getInstance().getIcon(“blah”, IconFamily.SMALL); I find that just painful. I’m willing to be convinced? * * * Messages mailing list [Messages@forums.vassalengine.org](mailto:Messages@forums.vassalengine.org) [forums.vassalengine.org/mailman/ … engine.org](http://forums.vassalengine.org/mailman/listinfo/messages_forums.vassalengine.org) Post generated using Mail2Forum ([mail2forum.com](http://www.mail2forum.com)) ---
**Author:** ![uckelman](https://forum.vassalengine.org/user_avatar/forum.vassalengine.org/uckelman/32/10020_2.png) [@uckelman](https://forum.vassalengine.org/u/uckelman)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2009, 12:13am UTC](https://forum.vassalengine.org/t/icons/1469/18 "2009-01-20T00:13:40Z")
Thus spake “Brent Easton”: > [@](#): > > Joel, > > > [@](#): > > > > Should we include a message dialog suggesting that people use SVG when they > > try to add a bitmap for the scalable icon? > > This is only stage 1 of the Icon code to allow developers to access Icons we > have loaded directly into Vassal. > I haven’t written te bit that allows developers to load their own Icon Famili > es into a module. (That bit isn’t needed until we modify LaunchButton to use > Icon Families). At that point, we can give people a gently reminder that scal > able icons ‘ought’ to be svg. I’d like to. I think this is a point on which we should try to educate our module designers. In the long run, the more vector graphics are created and the more vector graphics expertise is built up among our module designers, the better. > [@](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > Comments on IconFactory: > > > > 1. I would not spell “iconFamilys” that way. Shouldn’t it be > > “iconFamilies”? > > Or is this a difference between American English and Australian English I’m > > not aware of? > > Oh, yes, I guess so. Which one? Is that really the plural of “family” for you, or is it a typo? I’m curious now. > [@](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > 1. Why use a TreeMap instead of a HashMap here? The main reason to use a > > TreeMap is if you need to preserve the insertion order, but I don’t see > > anything but puts and gets against the map here. > > I thought the reason to use a TreeMap was to allow you to traverse the keys i > n a sorted order? Oh, right. I was thinking of a LinkedHashMap, not a TreeMap. > [@](#): > > Stage 1 doesn’t use this, but later, we will need to generate a list of avail > able Icons in a Icon Family Picker. Since this only will only happen in the E > ditor, it makes sense to just sort the Family names in the IconFamilyPicker. I think there could be some threading problems here if you don’t use a ConcurrentHashMap, BTW. What will happen if two different threads request a BufferedImage at the same time? > [@](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > 1. Should IconFactory be a singleton? It might be cleaner to have all of > > the state be members of the single IconFactory instance, and use > > getInstance() to fetch that. > > I wonder sometimes about the usefulness of the Singleton pattern. Only one in > stance of IconFactory will ever be created and I certainly don’t want the cal > l to get an Icon to be > > IconFactory.getInstance().getIcon(“blah”, IconFamily.SMALL); > > I find that just painful. > > I’m willing to be convinced? That’s actually not what I was suggesting. I don’t like the verbosity of getInstance(). What I do like is having a single internal object keep the state, and to have _that_ be a singleton. What I was suggesting is that the IconFactory class act as a cover for an inner private class. (If that doesn’t make sense, I’ll show you what I mean in a day or two.) – J. * * * Messages mailing list [Messages@forums.vassalengine.org](mailto:Messages@forums.vassalengine.org) [forums.vassalengine.org/mailman/ … engine.org](http://forums.vassalengine.org/mailman/listinfo/messages_forums.vassalengine.org) Post generated using Mail2Forum ([mail2forum.com](http://www.mail2forum.com)) ---
**Author:** ![Brent\_Easton](https://forum.vassalengine.org/user_avatar/forum.vassalengine.org/brent_easton/32/10_2.png) [@Brent\_Easton](https://forum.vassalengine.org/u/Brent_Easton)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2009, 12:36am UTC](https://forum.vassalengine.org/t/icons/1469/19 "2009-01-20T00:36:48Z")
> [@](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > > [@](#): > > > > > > 1. I would not spell “iconFamilys” that way. Shouldn’t it be > > > “iconFamilies”? > > > Or is this a difference between American English and Australian English > > I’m > > > [@](#): > > > > > [@](#): > > > > > > not aware of? > > > > Oh, yes, I guess so. > > Which one? Is that really the plural of “family” for you, or is it a typo? > I’m curious now. I was being lazy, iconFamilies is correct Australian english also. > [@](#): > > I think there could be some threading problems here if you don’t use a > ConcurrentHashMap, BTW. What will happen if two different threads request a BufferedImage at the same time? Yes, I hadn’t considered threading yet. I will fix. > [@](#): > > That’s actually not what I was suggesting. I don’t like the verbosity > of getInstance(). What I do like is having a single internal object keep > the state, and to have _that_ be a singleton. What I was suggesting is that > the IconFactory class act as a cover for an inner private class. (If that > doesn’t make sense, I’ll show you what I mean in a day or two.) Ok, I know what you mean (I think). The getInstance() calls will be internal. Does it need to be an inner private class, or will private instance variables of IconFactory do? That’s the way I’ve seen it done in other parts of Vassal. Leave it with me, i’ll make a few changes. B. * * * Messages mailing list [Messages@forums.vassalengine.org](mailto:Messages@forums.vassalengine.org) [forums.vassalengine.org/mailman/ … engine.org](http://forums.vassalengine.org/mailman/listinfo/messages_forums.vassalengine.org) Post generated using Mail2Forum ([mail2forum.com](http://www.mail2forum.com)) ---
**Author:** ![Tim\_M](https://forum.vassalengine.org/user_avatar/forum.vassalengine.org/tim_m/32/2_2.png) [@Tim\_M](https://forum.vassalengine.org/u/Tim_M)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2009, 12:45am UTC](https://forum.vassalengine.org/t/icons/1469/20 "2009-01-20T00:45:16Z")
> [@uckelman](#): > > Thus spake “Brent Easton”: > > > [@](#): > > > > Joel, > > > > > [@](#): > > > > > > Should we include a message dialog suggesting that people use SVG when they > > > try to add a bitmap for the scalable icon? > > > > This is only stage 1 of the Icon code to allow developers to access Icons we > > have loaded directly into Vassal. > > I haven’t written te bit that allows developers to load their own Icon Famili > > es into a module. (That bit isn’t needed until we modify LaunchButton to use > > Icon Families). At that point, we can give people a gently reminder that scal > > able icons ‘ought’ to be svg. > > I’d like to. I think this is a point on which we should try to educate > our module designers. In the long run, the more vector graphics are created > and the more vector graphics expertise is built up among our module designers, > the better. > > J. How far will SVG support be extended (i.e into module trait componernts)? While most of us generally receive bmp/gifs/png from publishers, therefore making this moot, unless we are creating are own images or the few lucky of us with acces to the publisher svg’s, I could see the possibility where controlling the svg and placing its parts in layers we could then open up different parts of a “built game piece” to scaling etc… I cant think of any good reason why I’d do this (yet) but given enough time I’d come up with some hair brained scheme to use it in some way for no other reason but that I can 🙂 [Next page](https://forum.vassalengine.org/t/icons/1469.md?page=2)