Bug 177176

Summary: Background artwork needs to take into account wide-aspect screens
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: Rodd Clarkson <rodd>
Component: redhat-artworkAssignee: John (J5) Palmieri <johnp>
Status: CLOSED DUPLICATE QA Contact:
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: rawhideCC: jkeck
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: All   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2006-02-05 04:46:54 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description Rodd Clarkson 2006-01-06 23:35:07 UTC
Description of problem:

With the growing number of wide-aspect screens on the market, desktop
backgrounds (especially the default one) need to take into account these screen
dimensions.

While using the 'fill-screen' option works to some degree, it leaves artwork
(especially text and logos - often present on the default background) mis-shaped.

What is needed is a two fold approach.

Firstly, background artwork needs to be supplied in a wide aspect format.  For
example, 1920 x 1200, instead of 1600 x 1200.  This would fill all but the
largests screen (and maybe it needs to be bigger again).

In conjunction with this, the background dialog needs an option to 'scale, but
fill screen'.  The current scale option sees the image scaled, but only to the
narrower of the two sizes, so for example a 1600x1200 images on a 1920x1200
screen would have space on either side, but a 1920x1200 image on a 1600x1200
screen would see the background with space above and below.  This new option
would see a 1920x1200 image on a 1600x1200 screen scaled, but with the sides
chopped off.  By doing this, you could extend current artwork to fit wide-aspect
screens, but so that they also work on standard 4x3 format screens too.
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):

Comment 1 Matthias Clasen 2006-02-05 04:46:54 UTC

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 175303 ***