NoDisplay interpretation

[Waldo Bastian]

On Monday 04 October 2004 18:34, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
> Hi Waldo,
>
> On Fri, 2004-10-01 at 14:09, Waldo Bastian wrote:
> > On Friday 01 October 2004 14:39, you wrote:
> > > 	A contrived example of when it makes a difference is when you have
> > > duplicated .desktop files. If the first .desktop file found contains
> > > NoDisplay=true, but the duplicate .desktop file contains
> > > NoDisplay=false, you'd expect the entry to not appear in the menu.
> > >
> > > 	However, if you consider the same example with Hidden=true, you
> > > actually *would* expect the entry to appear in the menu since the first
> > > .desktop file would not preclude the second .desktop file from being
> > > considered. Right?
> >
> > It depends on what you mean with "duplicated .desktop files". If they are
> > in the same relative location in the hierarchy, (e.g.
> > ~/.kde/share/applnk/foo.desktop and /usr/share/applnk/foo.desktop) they
> > get merged on a key by key basis and then after the merging we look at
> > the resulting Hidden and NoDisplay values.
>
> 	But isn't this the opposite of what the spec says?

Ah yes, indeed. KDE's legacy handling still does that, but it isn't part of 
the spec indeed.

Cheers,
Waldo
-- 
bastian at kde.org  |  Wanted: Talented KDE developer  |  bastian at suse.com
  http://www.suse.de/de/company/suse/jobs/suse_pbu/developer_kde.html
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/xdg/attachments/20041004/91c6b929/attachment.pgp