Notifications system discussion
ogoffart at tiscalinet.be
Tue Aug 10 12:17:58 EEST 2004
Le Mardi 10 Août 2004 09:48, Christian Hammond a écrit :
> There are some changes I want to make to the spec, which I would like
> some discussion on first.
Maybe, to keep confusion away, you could avoid to use the term "notification"
in your specs which make think to knotify, but uses "passive popup" or
"message bubble" or whatever. :-)
> 1) I'd like notification calls to take an application name and maybe
> an optional icon as well.
yes, ineed, that will help verry much the user to see in the title of the
message the application where the message is from.
> 2) I'd also like applications to send along a notification detail ID.
> The spec would define a number of standard notifications (which
> we'll no doubt be adding to quickly), and non-standard ones would
> use x-foo. This would allow the daemon to be more intelligent when
> it comes to filtering. Like, if you get a email notification from
> two apps within a very short time, only process one of them.
Not sure this will be usefull. the action on each popup will probably be
different. (what happen if you click on the popup)
> If we have an application name and type ID, we could do per-type
> customization. The one thing, though, is that you'd only be able to
> customize notifications that have already been seen, but
> (theoretically, depending on the daemon, again) a global customization
> would suffice normally anyway. So you could set all mail notifications
> to just play a sound, and all buddy notifications from a specific IM
> client to appear in a bubble. Or whatever.
Here I do not agree.
This is the job of KNotify to configure per notifications. So it's up to the
client (KNotify is the client for KDE applications) to let configure.
Or do you want finaly to reach something more complex like KNotify. (Mike
doesn't seems to be verry for it)
My idea was your specs just to popup a message around the systemtray.
More information about the xdg