On Mon, 2004-09-20 at 18:26 +0200, Piotr Szymanski wrote: > Hi, > Paweł Sakowski (Monday 20 of September 2004 18:20): > > I must have missed it (and could find it in my local pld-devel archive > > either). Could you repeat the argumentation (or provide a link)? In > > general I don't like spec violations, but if there's a good reason to do > > it... > This absolutely is not a spec violation.
I believe the common understanding of "recommendation" is as defined in RFC2119's definition of should, i.e. that there may exist "valid reasons" not to adhere to a requirement... > We just ignore the recommendation > which is a stupid one. ...and I don't find that a "valid reason". > There was no argumentation I commited a proposal and asked for comments noone > was against my view of vfolders in PLD. I don't mind your approach (not duplicating categories in PLD desktop files), but have a doubt: > makes it harder to build a readable menu [from another mail] What menu building tool are you referring to? If it doesn't support "AudioVideo;Audio;" very well, it's not conformant (here, strictly speak with menu-spec. The spec explicitly allows for such text to appear in conformant desktop files -- and these might come from an external (non- PLD) source, and not apply the PLD-doc/vfolders convention, still being valid. -- +----------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Paweł Sakowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Never trust a man | | who can count up to 1023 on his fingers. | +----------------------------------------------------------------------+ _______________________________________________ pld-devel-en mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
