If gnome desktop shipped without any icons or assets would we still consider it free software? I just don't understand how releasing only a subset of the code,

If gnome desktop shipped without any icons or assets would we still consider it free software? I just don't understand how releasing only a subset of the code, or code not in its preferred editing format is "not free", but failing to release assets critical to the working of the program somehow maintains freedom. I mean you could also decompile the program which is a lot easier than recreating the art assets from scratch. Since you've confirmed I share a different opinion, it seems Stallman has a bias toward console applications where art is not a critical component. That's the most charitable interpretation for this cognitive dissonance I can think of.