Re: Starting discussion on a new version of the notification spec

2009-06-15 Thread Brian J. Tarricone
William Jon McCann wrote: > Hey, > > On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 1:45 PM, Brian J. Tarricone wrote: >> On 06/15/2009 08:10 AM, William Jon McCann wrote: >> >>> Do you have a specific response to the problems that they describe at >>> the following? >>> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/NotificationDevelopmentGu

Re: Starting discussion on a new version of the notification spec

2009-06-15 Thread William Jon McCann
Hey, On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 1:45 PM, Brian J. Tarricone wrote: > On 06/15/2009 08:10 AM, William Jon McCann wrote: > >> Do you have a specific response to the problems that they describe at >> the following? >> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/NotificationDevelopmentGuidelines#Avoiding%20actions >> >> I'd

Re: Starting discussion on a new version of the notification spec

2009-06-15 Thread Brian J. Tarricone
On 06/15/2009 08:10 AM, William Jon McCann wrote: > Do you have a specific response to the problems that they describe at > the following? > https://wiki.ubuntu.com/NotificationDevelopmentGuidelines#Avoiding%20actions > > I'd be very interested to see it. I think that rationale is fairly > compel

Re: [New] Desktop Preferred Applications Specification

2009-06-15 Thread André Gillibert
"Aaron J. Seigo" écrivit: > On Saturday 06 June 2009, PCMan wrote: > > Here is the full specification. > > http://wiki.lxde.org/en/Desktop_Preferred_Applications_Specification > > using the mimetype database with entries crafted for default applications is > something i suggested 2-3 years ago a

Re: Starting discussion on a new version of the notification spec

2009-06-15 Thread William Jon McCann
Hi, On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 5:26 PM, Christian Hammond wrote: > > On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 2:23 PM, Brian J. Tarricone > wrote: >> >> On 06/13/2009 02:18 PM, Aurélien Gâteau wrote: >> > Brian J. Tarricone wrote: >> >> 1.  Passive vs. active notifications.  I recall that notify-osd >> >> unilateral

Re: about names for special folders

2009-06-15 Thread Rodney Dawes
As I already stated elsewhere, I think folder-foo is better here, absent the usage of emblems on the normal folder icon, which would be more appropriate. Though, I think there are some oddities in the naming of the folders themselves, which we might want to avoid duplicating in the icon names for

Re: about names for special folders

2009-06-15 Thread Nicolò Chieffo
NEWS: now there's an official committed patch to GLIB, which uses "folder-foo" icons (actually they fall back to "folder" if the icon is not present in the theme). I hope they can be included into the official naming spec, so that themes will start to ship them!

Re: Starting discussion on a new version of the notification spec

2009-06-15 Thread Marc-André Lureau
Hi On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 3:38 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote: > On Mon, 15.06.09 11:38, Mirco Müller (mirco.muel...@canonical.com) wrote: > >> Am Samstag, den 13.06.2009, 23:18 +0200 schrieb Aurélien Gâteau: >> >> > > 3.  The Ubuntu spec adds a 'sound-themed' hint, while we already have >> > > 'so

Re: Starting discussion on a new version of the notification spec

2009-06-15 Thread Lennart Poettering
On Mon, 15.06.09 11:38, Mirco Müller (mirco.muel...@canonical.com) wrote: > Am Samstag, den 13.06.2009, 23:18 +0200 schrieb Aurélien Gâteau: > > > > 3. The Ubuntu spec adds a 'sound-themed' hint, while we already have > > > 'sound-file'. I'd suggest just overloading 'sound-file' to take either

Re: Starting discussion on a new version of the notification spec

2009-06-15 Thread Aurélien Gâteau
Mirco Müller wrote: > Am Samstag, den 13.06.2009, 23:18 +0200 schrieb Aurélien Gâteau: > >>> 3. The Ubuntu spec adds a 'sound-themed' hint, while we already have >>> 'sound-file'. I'd suggest just overloading 'sound-file' to take either >>> a sound theme name or a sound file. Implementations

Re: Starting discussion on a new version of the notification spec

2009-06-15 Thread Mirco Müller
Hey ChipX86! Am Samstag, den 13.06.2009, 14:26 -0700 schrieb Christian Hammond: > I'll fight any change to remove action support from the spec to the > death :) As long as "actions" are optional (and apps correctly do check if a daemon has support for them :) we're all good. Best regard

Re: Starting discussion on a new version of the notification spec

2009-06-15 Thread Mirco Müller
Am Samstag, den 13.06.2009, 23:18 +0200 schrieb Aurélien Gâteau: > > 3. The Ubuntu spec adds a 'sound-themed' hint, while we already have > > 'sound-file'. I'd suggest just overloading 'sound-file' to take either > > a sound theme name or a sound file. Implementations that only support a > >

Re: Notification spec issue: Ability to assign an icon *and* an image to a notification

2009-06-15 Thread Aurélien Gâteau
A. Walton wrote: > 2009/6/13 Aurélien Gâteau : >> A. Walton wrote: >>> 2009/6/12 Aurélien Gâteau : As of KDE 4.3, KDE uses its own DBus interface, which is quite similar to the org.freedesktop.Notifications except the "icon_data" hint is named "image_data" and the implementation show

Re: Starting discussion on a new version of the notification spec

2009-06-15 Thread Aurélien Gâteau
A. Walton wrote: > On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 6:19 PM, Brian J. Tarricone wrote: >> On 06/13/2009 03:11 PM, Christian Hammond wrote: >>> On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 3:08 PM, Brian J. Tarriconewrote: >>> Might be a little OT for xdg-list, but: would you be interested in adding support to libnotif