Proposal for a MIME mapping spec
stuart at terminus.co.uk
Thu Jul 8 18:46:47 EEST 2004
Alexander Larsson wrote:
> On Thu, 2004-07-08 at 11:12, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
>>>The current desktop file lists 'Actions' as a possible entry. We
>>>decided against including actions in this specification. It is
>>>currently left for desktop projects to implement in their own fashion.
>> Ah, no ... Please, can we not just dump this if we don't think its
> I believe that is what the text says/means.
Is there a reason why people think "Actions" are not useful? I
understand if people don't want to deal with them right now - any
movement forward is welcomed and I thank the people putting the effort
in. If they're going to be looked at later (not necessarily soon) that's
great. Certainly if they're not going to be defined in the spec then
drop the reference to them.
So why do I think they're useful? There are many things one can do with
"text/html" or "image/jpeg". Typically, you just want to *view* it. So
that would be $default_web_browser/gqview. Maybe I want to *edit* it?
That would be bluefish/gimp. What about printing? Converting to other
formats? One application most certainly does not fit all.
Granted there are many issues here which I don't offer answers to, let
alone implementation ideas for - but I hope this is something that is
recognised as a requirement (even if it doesn't below in this [iteration
of the] spec).
More information about the xdg