PATCH: Menu Spec - Categories
waldo.bastian at intel.com
Fri Sep 8 23:30:19 EEST 2006
The problem is that in the current state of affairs, just including
ScreenSaver will have it show up properly in Gnome, but not in KDE. My
intention is not to forbid things, but to describe what must be done so
that things will work properly. One option is to make ScreenSaver a main
category with a note that recommends the inclusion of
"X-KDE-ScreenSaver" as well, KDE must of course be willing to (continue
to) support that in KDE4 then.
Linux Client Architect - Client Linux Foundation Technology
Channel Platform Solutions Group
Intel Corporation - http://www.intel.com/opensource
OSDL DTL Tech Board Chairman
From: william.jon.mccann at gmail.com [mailto:william.jon.mccann at gmail.com]
On Behalf Of William Jon McCann
Sent: Thursday, September 07, 2006 8:50 PM
To: Bastian, Waldo
Cc: xdg at freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: PATCH: Menu Spec - Categories
On 9/7/06, Bastian, Waldo < waldo.bastian at intel.com
<mailto:waldo.bastian at intel.com> > wrote:
I have made a patch for the Appendix A of the menu spec that clarifies
what desktop entries can expect in terms of supported categories and
what desktop environments must support. I will also attach a HTML
version of the new Appendix for your convenience in a followup mail.
In GNOME we install desktop files for programs that provide screensaver
functionality with "Categories=GNOME;Screensaver;" . We then install
a menu that includes all Screensaver category programs . This menu
is not used by the gnome-panel menus  but by the screensaver
framework to look up programs. There is some precedent for this type of
thing. For example, even when "main applications menus" don't show
items from the Settings category they have been used by various control
panel shells .
This seemed to have been allowed by the previous versions of the spec.
However, in this patch you have added:
"Additional Categories should always be used in combination with one of
the Main Categories."
That said, it seems to me that your changes are worthwhile. So, what
should we do? Are you trying to explicitly forbid this type of usage?
Or can we interpret this, as written, as a strong recommendation but not
a requirement? Can we promote Screensaver to a main category similar to
I think that this usage is worthwhile for its potential as a desktop
neutral way for third parties to define screensaver modes.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the xdg