On Wednesday, February 17, 2021 9:53 AM, Thomas Kluyver <[email protected]>
wrote:
I can see what you're saying, but I don't think it's ridiculous to suggest that
a desktop file could encode some indication of how well an application handles
a particular file type. You could think of this as describing 'can open' vs
'can import'. A few more examples from my laptop of technically possible
matches that you probably wouldn't want to be used by default:
* Libreoffice Writer & text/plain
* Libreoffice Draw & application/pdf
* Pinta (bitmap graphics editor) & image/svg
* File roller (archive manager) & application/x-chrome-extension
I don't have a problem in principle with giving desktop files a way to express
a quality of support measure for the various MIME types they can handle.
That's about the capabilities of the software, not about system policy,
notwithstanding that tools that implement policy could rely on such data in
making decisions. But that's qualitatively different from Jehan's proposal as
I understand it. In particular, I don't envision that if such a mechanism were
implemented in the spec and software, and used as intended by the GIMP, that it
would in fact satisfactorily resolve the issue that motivated the proposal.
In my experience, things like this haven't really come up, so I'm inclined to
agree with you that it doesn't warrant changing the standard. But I think it's
better to understand what's specifically going wrong and work out how else it
can be improved, rather than insisting that this could never be part of a
desktop file. Labelling options with some kind of priority is compromise we
live with in various places.
I am all for understanding the problem and its context in order to find an
appropriate solution. It is based on my present understanding of the context
that I persist in asserting that desktop files should not express policy. I
don't see anything in the specific problem presented that challenges that
position as far as I am concerned, and I am having trouble imagining what sort
of thing would. In short: although firm, my position is analytical, not
dogmatic.
John
________________________________
Email Disclaimer: www.stjude.org/emaildisclaimer
Consultation Disclaimer: www.stjude.org/consultationdisclaimer
_______________________________________________
xdg mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xdg
