On Saturday, August 30, 2014 14:31:16 Thomas Pfeiffer wrote: > Yes, that doesn't say that Plasma will definitely hide passive SNIs, but > according to this specification, developers should actually _expect_ > visualizations to hide passive SNIs. So, according to this specification, > applications that rely on passive SNIs _not_ to be hidden are clearly doing > it wrong, and we could hit them over the head with the spec if they > complain. > > [1] http://www.notmart.org/misc/statusnotifieritem/statusnotifieritem.html
Note that from my experience, it doesn't work like that. Application authors won't complain, giving an opportunity to "hit them over the head with the spec", they'll just abuse the implementation to get the behaviour as close to what they imagine to be good (whether it is good or not is a different story entirely). This is not "wrong or right" thing, it's a matter of encouraging the right behaviour (and offering something desirable in the first place). That said, I'm not against trying it. -- sebas http://www.kde.org | http://vizZzion.org | GPG Key ID: 9119 0EF9 _______________________________________________ Plasma-devel mailing list Plasma-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel
