I've had time to figure it out. I'm a bit slow sometimes, and I don't consider it a bad thing :).
My conclusions:
1_
The "Plugin Editor" window can't have the "pluginEdit" icon, because it's a separate window, and that would cause confusion for the user. To make the user perceive the window as part of the application, including the Qtractor Gramophone in the window icon is a good idea.
(In my new version of the theme, which I haven't uploaded yet, I've corrected this in the plugin editing and MIDI editor windows, which are the ones that remain separate in the standard configuration.)
2_
However, according to my logic, the "Plugins" window... shouldn't have the "pluginEdit" icon... because that window has nothing to do with editing plugins. It should have its own "qtractorPlugins" icon.
Don't you want to create a new icon and use the same one? Okay, duplicate it and rename it. But it must have the correct nomenclature, otherwise the logic is compromised.
3_
I should stop using the word "error." After all, they are approaches. First, explain the approach, then determine whether there is an error, or simply whether the new approach contributes something.
I've had time to figure it out. I'm a bit slow sometimes, and I don't consider it a bad thing :).
My conclusions:
1_
The "Plugin Editor" window can't have the "pluginEdit" icon, because it's a separate window, and that would cause confusion for the user. To make the user perceive the window as part of the application, including the Qtractor Gramophone in the window icon is a good idea.
(In my new version of the theme, which I haven't uploaded yet, I've corrected this in the plugin editing and MIDI editor windows, which are the ones that remain separate in the standard configuration.)
2_
However, according to my logic, the "Plugins" window... shouldn't have the "pluginEdit" icon... because that window has nothing to do with editing plugins. It should have its own "qtractorPlugins" icon.
Don't you want to create a new icon and use the same one? Okay, duplicate it and rename it. But it must have the correct nomenclature, otherwise the logic is compromised.
3_
I should stop using the word "error." After all, they are approaches. First, explain the approach, then determine whether there is an error, or simply whether the new approach contributes something.
Best regards :)