On Sunday 31 August 2014 13:17:34 Sebastian Kügler wrote: > 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.
I think the first step towards that would be finishing a proper cross-desktop specification so that it's clear what we want encourage people to do. See my mail "State of the StatusNotifierIcon spec and implementation". _______________________________________________ Plasma-devel mailing list Plasma-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel
