User talk:Circeus/BSicon renaming/Parallel

Some thoughts…

• Advantage: simpler roots, shorter icon names.
• Disadvantage: existing compound roots allow for quick naming of new combinations (based on single-line icons).

Useddenim (talk) 18:34, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

I'll fully admit to a bias in favor of a more elegant solution than compound whenever possible (plus icons like   (vABZr+r-STRe),  (vSTRr-xKRZ) or  (vKRZl-KRZr) really stretches the pattern established by things like  (vxKRZo-ABZgr)). This is one area where wiggle room exist, though I very firmly believe that the curve set, amongst others, can be made drastically more intuitive with this system. Circeus (talk) 19:04, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Line 1 & line 2

Existing icons, eg.  (vBHF-STR), read (as viewed on the page) from left to right. Circeus’ proposal appears to number the lines from right to left. Do we really need to introduce more counter-intuitive icon naming? Useddenim (talk) 18:38, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

As it is the current compound icons already run counter to the "normal" direction. Technically there is nothing to keep from having the numbering 1-2, but with 2 becoming the main line (as I suspect they won't occur together that often). 18:47, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

General thought

Parallel icons should always be recognizable by a "v"-prefix! a×p_de^Hello! 19:35, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Is this aimed at the l- prefix? Technically the icons with it are not parallel lines anyway (the idea is that they are a way to handle one-line parallel icon without using the dash)Circeus (talk) 19:52, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

"v" is used to indicate all icons that start/end at 125/375 Pixel. The "l" prefix is discussed to denote legende icons. a×p_de^Hello! 20:35, 11 October 2011 (UTC)