Proposed draft for the thumbnail D-Bus specification

[Alexander Larsson]

On Fri, 2008-10-17 at 09:36 +0200, Alexander Larsson wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-10-16 at 23:35 +0200, Philip Van Hoof wrote:
> > On Fri, 2008-10-10 at 11:40 +0200, Alexander Larsson wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2008-10-10 at 11:26 +0200, Alexander Larsson wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 2008-09-03 at 16:15 +0200, Philip Van Hoof wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > For nautilus, what I do is queue all the thumbnailable files in the
> > > > directory for thumbnailing, but then I prioritize the files that are
> > > > currently visible. So, when you scroll all the newly showed files are
> > > > pushed to the top of the queue. This seems much better than queueing
> > > > just the visible files each time you scroll, as then the non-visible
> > > > icons won't be thumbnailing in the background waiting for you to scroll.
> > > 
> > > Oh, and while talking about nautilus. I'm not sure this is very
> > > interesting for us to use. I don't see any advantages with this compared
> > > to what we already have (its the same, just via dbus), and it seems
> > > limited in scope compared to what we eventually want (like larger
> > > previews in a preview pane).
> > 
> > What I was having in mind for Nautilus was not to be a consumer, but
> > rather be a provider of the service.
> > 
> > That way whenever a consumer would ask for a thumbnail, it would be
> > Nautilus that would fulfill it.
> 
> I see what you mean, yeah that could make sense.

Or rather, it makes sense for the generic thumbnailer interface. For the
lowlevel thumbnailers, we already have our own system for specifying
them. I'm not sure why they are in the same spec actually, seems to be a
lower level item targeted at a different userbase.