Sure sure. I didn't meant to imply back and forward menu items should have icons, only that I have a feeling that in general icons that sit on buttons should be symbolic.
Making the icons in Humanity monochrome (without the -symbolic namespace) would create a situation where white icons appear on a white background (these icons aren't always used in a toolbar). I think no matter what the decision, it wouldn't be a good idea to use monochromatic icons outside the -symbolic namespace. And unfortunately this involves a developer choice to "opt-in" to using symbolic icons. So in this way, I can't say this is a bug in the Humanity theme. Humanity can't force a developer to use the -symbolic icon variant. Sure, I've seen applications where a developer uses the arrow icon to move an item from one list to another or to move a user interface element (like a side panel) from one side of the screen to the other. Both of these cases involve icons that do not appear in a toolbar. Is it an appropriate use of that icon name? Probably not. But the case does exist and I wouldn't be surprised if it existed in one of the applications Ubuntu ships as default. I guess the issue with Firefox would extend to what the de facto method to display forward and back buttons in Ubuntu is. No matter whether it's 24px color icons, 16px color icons on a segmented button, or 16px symbolic icons on a segmented button, or something else entirely the issue there would be with consistency. So, in a way, the real questions is, "What's the Ubuntu way to do this UI element?" -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/840659 Title: Use symbolic icons in history buttons To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/software-center/+bug/840659/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
