Proposing the StatusNotifier specification

[Aaron J. Seigo]

On January 25, 2010, Giles Atkinson wrote:
> Aaaron,
> 
> Another deferred follow-up, but on 19th January, you wrote:
> > would it help if the entry for ApplicationStatus was extended from ...
> > to something like: ...
> 
> I think that would answer the category objection entirely.

great; we'll include that in the spec then.

> > is there information in these systems that offers a categorization?
> 
> In my case the application just gets an icon image and a text fragment to
> be displayed on mouse-over.

right, so really not much to work with. unfortunate, but that's how it goes at 
times :)

> > if you could offer an example of the sentence you have in mind, that
> > would be helpful.
> 
> How about "Implementations that previously offered a similar service via
> the Xembed-based system tray specification SHOULD give consideration to
> support for older clients, maintaining support for the older interface for
> a transitional period."

that seems sensible to me as well; let's include it :)

> It might also be useful to specify the mapping between the interfaces,
> insofar as one exists.  For example WM_NAME, might map to "Title" in the
> new interface.

that would make for a nice appendix with an "advisory" status, imho. i don't 
know when we will get to such a thing ourselves (Marco, myself) due to time 
constraints, but if anyone else would like to contribute such a table that 
would make it happen a lot quicker.

-- 
Aaron J. Seigo
humru othro a kohnu se
GPG Fingerprint: 8B8B 2209 0C6F 7C47 B1EA  EE75 D6B7 2EB1 A7F1 DB43

KDE core developer sponsored by Qt Development Frameworks