:)
It seems that after a lot of discussion we are back at the beginning (in terms 
of plans):

Define a bunch of Activities/Contexts (I still prefer Context) and let one be 
active. Apps will then follow the chosen context when they get informed by 
the service or ask the service.

Sorry, I am not one to write long mails. I tend to throw out little bits. ;)

Actually, how about an irc meeting this week to get the ball rolling. I would 
propose we create a nepomuk service that provides the API and is wrapped in 
Plasma::Context. We can then continue from there...

Cheers,
Sebastian

On Sunday 31 August 2008 05:16:14 Hari krishna Anandhan wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 11:53 PM, Aaron J. Seigo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > this will come down t winow management following the activity; whether or
> > not this will end up in kwin or elsewhere remains to be seen, but an app
> > associated strongly with a given activity (e.g. set to launch with it)
> > should get "put away" when the activity changes.
> >
> > depending on the application, "put away" can mean either actually
> > quitting the process or just hiding it from the user.
> >
> > most non-document-centric applications, will likely adjust what they are
> > showing based on the current context.
> >
> > document centric ones will come and go with the activity.
>
> right. makes sense ;)
>
> > KGet is not really document centric, it's more service centric. as such,
> > i would expect it to continue donwloading no matter what i was doing and
> > i really don't see "associating KGet with an activity" to make any sense
> > whatsoever on the application level.
>
> well, there might be scenarios where the downloads tagged with
> officialActivity have more download precedence than those in
> homeActivity...
>
> > but on the service level (or, per-download) KGet could:
> >
> > * adjust its download strategy depending on the activity
> >
> > * tag files with the activity that was active at the time the file
> > started downloading
>
> ok. that brings out a lot of details on what you have envisioned ....
> i am starting to feel that my apprehension could be farfetched ;)
>
> >> No, I completely understand what you were saying...What I am saying is
> >> that there may be background or batch processes, where this *might*
> >> break
> >
> > i have yet to come across such scenarios.
>
> ok. lets tackle any when they come. Now moving on ;)
>
> >> if it is just plasma which manages this whole thing, without
> >> KWin knowledge
> >
> > plasma has insight into the running applications; how do you think it
> > shows a taskbar or a pager?
>
> yes, via dataengines !
> but "whole thing" actually referred to active context ...
>
> > *if* we had more than one control point, then we end up with applications
> > having to negotiate what the current activity is. good luck.
> >
> > the Plasma desktop workspace was designed to give users a way to define
> > their current activity and the plan was to let the rest of the desktop
> > know about it. if other apps don't care, they don't have to follow it.
> >
> > i fully expect other applications to cooperate, but not control the
> > current activity.
>
> that makes sense ;)
> Moving on ;)
> _______________________________________________
> nepomuk-kde mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.semanticdesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/nepomuk-kde


_______________________________________________
nepomuk-kde mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.semanticdesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/nepomuk-kde

Reply via email to