<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
I think that they are terrible. Although it is possible to learn what
they are, it is not obvious. The old ones were much better.<br>
Wilbur<br>
<br>
nodata wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid21830.213.164.3.90.1114778970.squirrel@www.nodata.co.uk"
type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">On Fri, 2005-04-29 at 09:35 +0200, <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:shrek-m@gmx.de">shrek-m@gmx.de</a> wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">nodata wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Quick question - does anyone find the new openoffice.org icons
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">difficult
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">to understand?
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">not really, afair
writer = lines
calc = table
impress = monitor/beamer
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">database = silo
Ah, the age old question of iconography. Icons only mean something if
you know what they mean (which is of course self serving).
Someone once told me that you should never teach students how to use a
program based on the icons in the application because they may well mean
nothing in similar applications and then the person will have troubles
using alternative (but comparable) software.
I think it's a fair cop. Take a look at lots of applications and
imagine all the other meanings icons could have if you didn't know what
they did and I think you'll get the gist.
Rodd
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
My icons are blue or green, with a feint squiggle. If you squint at the
squiggle, you can decipher them.
Three feint squiggles in a row on dark blue means Writer.
Some faint box squiggles in a grid means Calc.
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>