> Obligatory Warning: No new URIs. > > People far smarter than me have explained why it is a bad idea and it is > something Gnome is not likely to do casually. > > file:// and http:// should be good enough for 99% of cases where people > suggest new URIs. Using new URIs means you need to write new tools and > you immediately obselete all the existing tools. > > Please think of the children > New URIs make baby Jesus cry
Hmm, that's a thought. Why does gnome have so many URI's? Hmm, we have; start-here:// server-settings:// system-settings:// trash:// applications:// prefrences:// Aren't some of these kind of redundant? Couldn't a few of them simply be consolidated into say; gnome:// (eg: gnome://server-settings/ gnome://system-settings/)? After all, a good number of them do the exact same thing just with different locations (sans trash). It'd reduce the number of handlers needed for one, and possibly make other things a little cleaner and more expandable. Or am I simply being minimalistic and silly? -Jason H. (Sorry Alan, stupid reply button...) _______________________________________________ Usability mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/usability
