There's no need to include the priority value on fd.o.xml; I was thinking they should have a reasonable default, and if a package wants to overload an existing mime type they should define the priority value. Anything else should be considered a bug.
J. Leclanche On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 1:22 PM, David Faure <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tuesday 05 March 2013 13:28:15 Thomas Kluyver wrote: > > In the file structure, the priority attribute is a property of the magic > > matching rule, not of the mimetype. The description in the spec, on the > > other hand, seems to be relevant to the Mimetype overall: "Low numbers > > should be used for more generic types (such as 'gzip compressed data') > and > > higher values for specific subtypes (such as a word processor format that > > happens to use gzip to compress the file)." > > > > So does it make sense to use this even when we're not using the magic > > matching rules? > > No, the "glob weight" is what should be used to choose between two globs. > > But I guess the question is "what if the weights are the same?". Well, same > globs, same weight, and same magic (or no magic), is a complete conflict, I > don't think there's anything sensible to do other than fixing the mimetype > xml > (which has been done for this case already). > > Maybe Jerome meant addin a new package-level priority value, so that > freedesktop.org.xml always has priority over weird 3rd-party mimetype > definitions. But I'm not sure we really want that. > > -- > David Faure, [email protected], http://www.davidfaure.fr > Working on KDE, in particular KDE Frameworks 5 > > _______________________________________________ > xdg mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xdg >
_______________________________________________ xdg mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xdg
