Le vendredi 08 septembre 2006 à 13:17 -0700, Bastian, Waldo a écrit : > >Le jeudi 07 septembre 2006 à 18:30 -0700, Bastian, Waldo a écrit : > >> The menu spec currently makes some weak recommendations with regard to > >> how categories are to be used. The reality however is that for an > >> application to show up in the application menu it must either define its > >> own submenu or use a category out of a small defined set. The menu spec > >> doesn't make clear what that set is although it does provide some hints > >> in the right direction. What is also missing is a requirement that > >> desktop environments must continue to support this core set of > >> categories. Failure to do so would result in applications no longer > >> showing up in the menu which clearly can't be the intention. > >> > >> The above situation is compounded by the fact that Gnome based > >> implementations only place "Unallocated" entries in its menu if these > >> entries list the "Application" category. The menu spec does not mention > >> "Application" as category. We can either ignore this and effectively > >> killing the "OnlyUnallocated" fallback, or add to the spec that all > >> desktop files should include "Application" as category. > > > >I'm sorry I can't participate more in this discussion (I'm too busy > >finishing our Mandriva 2007.0 release, I should have more time in about > >two weeks) but you might want to have a look at one document I wrote for > >our transition to full "XDG" menu for Mandriva Linux 2007.0 where we > >discovered "missing" categories, compared with our earlier menu > >structure : > >http://qa.mandriva.com/twiki/bin/view/Main/MenuMigrationToXDG > > It shouldn't be a problem to add some additional secondary categories to the > spec.
I'd like to propose the following additional categories to the spec : Compression => Archiving isn't verbose enough for utilities like ark or file-roller Fax => Fax management software don't fall into Telephony current description (Telephony via PC) Chat => IRCClient is a little too much specific, an alias called Chat should be added, or IRCClient description should be much broad. VideoConference : currently, Telephony is only for VoIP, so videoconf applications don't belong in Telephony (or we could improve Telephony description to include VideoConference apps) Printing (or Printer) => HardwareSettings might be a little too crowed and there are a lot of printer tools which can justify adding this category Documentation (or Help) : self explanatory :) FileTools : FileManager is too specific for various random file tools (like getting file space usage, etc..) TextTools: tools to manipulate text file, such as dictionary, etc.. a bunch of Sciences subcategories : ArtificialIntelligence, ComputerScience, DataVisualization, Electricity, GeoSciences (well, this one might be covered by Geology..), ImageProcessing, NumericalAnalysis (could be covered by Math), ParallelComputing, Robotics a bunch of Education subcategories : Economy, Geography, History, Literature, Sport We are also missing a category for telephony stuff but not related to VoIP, but instead for applications managing phone systems, dialing a number, using a terminal emulator, etc.. I haven't figured a nice caterogy name for that, sorry ;) > > >Another thing which is missing in the current spec is some kind of > >two-pass for category matching : there is no way to specify some > >categories have more priority than other. For instance, as a vendor, we > >might want to move some entries to another category (so we add our own > >vendor category) but keep fdo category matching (maybe in another > >location in the menu tree). With current category matching, menu entry > >will be duplicated. > > There is two-pass (and exactly two) category matching. You can use the > <OnlyUnallocated> tag to do the matching in the second pass. Note that that > tag must be a child of the <Menu> tag, it's not a matching predicate. Unfortunately, OnlyUnallocated isn't flexible enough to be really useful for something else than "trash bin where we store anything we couldn't match". > >Another missing thing is a way to add a preference for category or > >layout matching based on ShowOnlyIn, allowing us to ship one menu > >description file with different menu order and matching for GNOME and > >KDE (favoring GNOME applications when running GNOME, KDE apps when using > >KDE). > > I'm working on a patch to allow desktop specific applications.menu files as > currently used by Kubuntu and others. I'm not sure it will solve exactly what I was writing about and moreover, it will add file duplication. But we will see. -- Frederic Crozat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Mandriva _______________________________________________ xdg mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xdg
