On Wednesday, May 16, 2012 01:20:21 PM Aaron J. Seigo wrote: > On Wednesday, May 16, 2012 11:14:46 Alex Fiestas wrote: > > So, what is the workspace for you? > > the components that take care of supporting the working area of the computer > and practices of the person using the system. these tasks include: > > * user session start / stop / switch > * power management > * application launch > * window management > * locating resources available on or to the device > * quick reference to information (some items in the system tray do this, > some plasmoids do this) > * interaction with system services (local file indexing, sound, networking, > etc.) > * presentation of actions belonging to "the system" (from a user's POV), > which would include things like file operation progress or notifications > > perhaps there are others as well. all of these bits need to be fit well > together. and applications which don't play a key role in the above are not > part of the workspace. > > so there's a bit of scope to which we can add a set of "big idea" goals (aka > "vision") so we can chart how to accomplish each of the things in the list > above. > > > Considering that applications like Dolphin or Gwenview are part of it as > > dolphin and gwenview are applications. they are not part of the workspace. > this is evident because: > > * they fulfill specific tasks (file management, image viewing); in contrast > plasma-desktop, kwin, krunner and system integration components such as > bluedevil do not meet specific tasks but enable one to engage in those > tasks. you can use kwin without a file manager; it's annoying to use > dolphin without a file manager. it's the app/system split. > > * they can be used in other desktop / workspace implementations without > feeling foreign or that they are duplicating an integral system service > > * the workspace can be used without them without any degredation of service > > > well as Solid (hardware integration) I find many parts of that vision > > vaguely applicable or at least not clearly applicable. > > that's because they are not part of the workspace. > > that begs the question: should we have an application vision? hell yes! (we > have one for Active, btw...) should it harmonize with the workspace vision? > double hell yes! there will be commonalities, there will also be > differences. big ones. > > applications are all about framing and delivering content. the workspace > needs to "get out of the way" of that as much as possible and provide an > integrative system for those applications to tap into. > > the vision for an image viewer is neatly confined by the defined task. > > the vison for a workspace is not, so those boundaries and parameters need to > be derived from a much large possible solution space. on the other hand, it > can also embody more dynamics as a result of not having a single, > self-evident task as an image viewer or file manager does.
I see and I agree on all you said (again be patience with me :p). We need then something like active where we can put all visions (workspace, applications, hardware support...) and create a more unified experience. _______________________________________________ Plasma-devel mailing list Plasma-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel
