On Thu, 2013-12-26 at 21:15 +0000, Jerome Leclanche wrote: > For the exact same reason menus and any kind of application runners > do. That is to say, not that much. It's needed for the rarer case > where the application accepts different parameters/different command > line depending on whether it has input args or not.
If you go to the gnome Applications menu and launch a program, it has no file arguments (it might have arguments, e.g. -gui to show the graphical user interface, but no files). I'm unclear about the case where this isn't sufficient. [...] > I understand the inherent > need to be conservative in a spec, but more often than not there is a > vicious circle building up of "We don't need it that much, so let's do > without it" -> "Now we need it more, but it's too late to change it". This is always a difficulty with standards. The way around it is to try and make extensible standards, but the desktop spec has only limited extensibility. > It does seem to > be that changes only happen once kde/gnome needs them. Or presumably other desktop environments if they can give a clear explanation of why something is needed, e.g. * what exactly does the user do * what currently happens * what do you want to happen * how do you think that should be achieved instead of throwing jargon around (intents, runners) :-) I'm getting the impression runners are some kind of KDE plugin thing, but I'm lost as to why they are relevant to a cross-desktop spec; I don't know what intents are at all in this context. Xross-desktop standards really only work when multiple desktops need to do something, and there's a need to share part of the implementation. Liam -- Liam Quin - XML Activity Lead, W3C, http://www.w3.org/People/Quin/ Pictures from old books: http://fromoldbooks.org/ Ankh: irc.sorcery.net irc.gnome.org freenode/#xml _______________________________________________ xdg mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xdg
